All states, through either statutes or court decisions, require landlords to observe the warranty of habitability in leases of residential property.. A warranty deed is also a guarantee
Trang 1Bench Warrants
A BENCH WARRANT is initiated by, and issued from, the bench or court directing a law enforcement officer to bring a specified person before the court A bench warrant is used, among other purposes, when a person has failed
to appear in response to a subpoena, summons,
or citation It is also used when an accused person needs to be transferred from jail to court for trial, and when a person’s failure to obey a court order puts him or her in CONTEMPT of court A bench warrant is sometimes called a
“capias” or an “alias warrant.”
Other Types Warrants
A STOCK WARRANTis an instrument granting the holder a long-term (usually a five- to ten-year term) option to buy shares of stock at a fixed price It is commonly attached to preferred stocks or bonds
A municipal warrant is an order to draw money from a municipality’s treasury for the payment of the municipality’s expenses or debts
Warrants may be used for financial transac-tions For example, a private individual may draw up a warrant authorizing another person
to pay out or deliver a sum of money or something else of value
A warrant may be issued to a collector of taxes, empowering him or her to collect taxes as itemized on the assessment role and to enforce the assessments by tax sales where necessary
FURTHER READINGS Hancock, Catherine 2009 “Warrants for Wearing a Wire:
Dissent in United States v White.” Mississippi Law Journal 79 (fall).
Lee, Christopher 2009 “The Viability of Area Warrants in a Suspicionless Search Regime ” University of Pennsylva-nia Journal of Constitutional Law 11 (April).
CROSS REFERENCES Fourth Amendment; Criminal Procedure.
WARRANT OF ATTORNEY
A written authorization that allows an attorney named in it to appear in court and admit the liability of the person giving the warrant in an action to collect a debt
This writing is usually given to help ensure that the person signing it will pay the amount that he or she would be obliged to pay if a
judgment were entered against him or her It usually contains an agreement that no action will be started against the signer if the obligation described in the paper is satisfied Essentially the warrant of attorney is a COGNOVIT NOTE that permits aCONFESSION OF JUDGMENT(a shortcut to obtaining a judgment against a debtor that is now illegal in most states)
CROSS REFERENCE Cognivit note.
WARRANTY
An assurance, promise, or guaranty by one party that a particular statement of fact is true and may
be relied upon by the other party
Warranties are used in a variety of commer-cial situations In many instances a business may voluntarily make a warranty In other situations the law implies a warranty where no express warranty was made Most warranties are made with respect to real estate, insurance, and sales and leases of goods and services
Real Estate
When land, houses, apartments, and other forms of real estate are sold or leased, the real estate usually comes with at least one warranty
In a sale of realty, the seller usually includes a warranty regarding the title to the property
In some cases the title may have a cloud on
it This means that some party other than the seller has a claim to the property Such claims may be made by a bank, a JUDGMENT DEBTOR, a construction company, or any other party that has obtained a lien against the property If the seller thinks that the title is clouded, the seller may offer a quitclaim deed This type of deed contains no promises as to the title and releases the seller from any liability to the buyer if a lien holder later makes a claim to the property
In other real estate transactions, the seller may warrant that the title is clear In this situation the seller gives the buyer a general warranty deed This kind of deed warrants that the title is clear and that the seller will be liable for any defects in the title that existed at the time of the sale
Other types of warranties related to real estate titles include special warranty deeds and covenants of further assurances A special warranty deed warrants only that no party made a claim to the property during the seller’s
308 WARRANT OF ATTORNEY
Trang 2ownership Under a special warranty deed, the
seller is not liable for any defects in the title
attributable to her predecessors A seller may
add to a deed aCOVENANTof further assurances,
which promises that the seller will take any steps
necessary to satisfy any claims to the property
Sellers and buyers of real estate may negotiate
warranties regarding the title to the property
They also may negotiate additional warranties
regarding the property, such as warranties on
plumbing or electricity or any other matter of
special concern
If the seller of real estate is the same party
who constructed a building on the property, a
warranty of habitability may be automatically
included in a sale of the property A warranty of
habitability in the context of a sale of real
property is a promise that the dwelling complies
with local BUILDING CODES, was built in a
professional manner, and is suitable for human
habitation
Warranties also accompany leases of real
property All states, through either statutes or
court decisions, require landlords to observe the
warranty of habitability in leases of residential
property In this context the warranty of
habitability is a promise that the premises
comply with all relevant building codes and
that they will be properly maintained and will
be fit for habitation throughout the period of
the tenancy Specifically, the landlord promises
to make necessary repairs in a prompt and
reasonable fashion and to provide such basic
services as water, heat, and electricity If a
landlord breaches the IMPLIED WARRANTY of
habitability, the tenant may withhold rent and
sue for any financial losses resulting from the
breach
Insurance
A warranty in an insurance policy is a promise
by the insured party that statements affecting
the validity of the contract are true Most
insurance contracts require the insured to make
certain warranties For example, to obtain a
HEALTH INSURANCE policy, an insured party may
have to warrant that he does not suffer from a
terminal disease If a warranty made by an
insured party turns out to be untrue, the insurer
may cancel the policy and refuse to cover
claims
Not all misstatements made by an insured
party give the insurer the right to cancel a policy
or refuse a claim Only misrepresentations on conditions and warranties in the contract give
an insurer such rights To qualify as a condition
or warranty, the statement must be expressly included in the contract, and the provision must clearly show that the parties intended that the rights of the insured and insurer would depend
on the truth of the statement
Warranties in insurance contracts can be divided into two types: affirmative or promis-sory An affirmative warranty is a statement regarding a fact at the time the contract was made A promissory warranty is a statement about future facts or about facts that will continue to be true throughout the term of the policy An untruthful affirmative warranty makes an insurance contract void at its incep-tion If a promissory warranty becomes true, the insurer may cancel coverage at such time as the warranty becomes untrue For example, if an insured party warrants that property to be covered by a fire insurance policy will never be used for the mixing of explosives, the insurer may cancel the policy if the insured party decides to start mixing explosives on the property Warranty provisions should contain language indicating whether they are affirmative
or promissory
Many states have created laws that protect insureds from cancellations due to misrepre-sented warranties Courts tend to favor insureds
by classifying indefinite warranties as affirma-tive Many state legislatures have created laws providing that no misrepresented warranty should cancel an insurance contract if the MISREPRESENTATION was not fraudulent and did not increase the risks covered by the policy
Sales and Leases of Goods
Every contract for the sale or lease of goods contains a warranty that the seller or lessor actually owns the property Courts hold that this warranty is implied if it is not included in the contract, and a seller or lessor cannot disclaim it
The two basic types of sales warranties are express warranties and implied warranties
Express warranties are specific promises made
by the seller and include oral representations, written representations, descriptions of the goods or services, representations in samples and models, and proof of prior quality of the goods or services Puffing, or the seller’s
WARRANTY 309
Trang 3exaggerated opinion of quality, does not constitute a warranty For example, if a car salesperson says, “This car will last you a lifetime,” a court would likely consider such a statement puffing and not an express warranty
Implied warranties are warranties that courts assume are implied in sales made by merchants A merchant is a person who is in the business of selling the good or service being sold
in the contract All sales contracts made by merchants contain an implied warranty of merchantability This is a promise that the goods, as they are described in the contract, pass without objection in the merchant’s trade, are fit for the ordinary purpose for which they are normally used, are adequately contained, pack-aged, and labeled, and conform to any promises
or affirmations of fact made on the container or label If the goods are fungible, or easily replaced or substituted, such as grain or oil, the replacement goods must be of fair and average quality, fit for their ordinary purposes, and similar to previous goods delivered in the same contract or previous similar contracts
In some situations a sales contract may include an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose This kind of warranty is a promise that the goods are useful for a special function Courts infer this warranty is implied when the seller has reason to know of a particular purpose for which the goods are required and also knows that the buyer is relying on the seller’s skill and knowledge in choosing the goods The buyer does not need to specifically inform the seller that the goods are for a particular purpose; it is enough that a reasonable seller would be aware of the purpose
For example, assume that a farmer, intend-ing to plant no-till soybeans, approaches a seller
to buy herbicide Assume further that the buyer requests a particular herbicide mix but the seller suggests a less expensive mix If the chemicals fail to kill crabgrass and the farmer has a low yield of soybeans, the farmer could sue the seller for breach of the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose because the seller knew what the farmer required
In some cases an implied warranty may be lost or waived If a seller issues a disclaimer—
for example, states that the goods are as is—and the buyer examines or refuses to examine the goods, the buyer may lose any implied warran-ties One important caveat is that courts will not
find that an implied warranty has been waived
if, under the circumstances of the sale, it is unreasonable to expect that the buyer would have understood that there were no warranties under the circumstances of the transaction
A seller may disclaim the warranty of merchantability either orally or in writing, but
a seller cannot orally disclaim a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose A disclaimer of the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose must be in writing, and the disclaimer must be conspicuous to the buyer Express warranties made by a seller may not be disclaimed However, if a disclaimer and an express warranty can be construed as consistent, a court may uphold the disclaimer
FURTHER READINGS Clark, Barkley, and Christopher Smith 2002 The Law of Product Warranties 2d ed Eagan, Minn.: West Group Crawford, Franklin E 2002 “Fit for Its Ordinary Purpose? Tobacco, Fast Food, and the Implied Warranty of Merchantability ” Ohio State Law Journal 63 (August) Glatzova, Vladimira 1998 “When Is a Warranty Not a Warranty? Common Law versus Civil Law ” Interna-tional Business Lawyer 26 (November).
CROSS REFERENCES Cloud on Title; Consumer Protection; Landlord and Tenant; Merchantable; Product Liability; Sales Law.
WARRANTY DEED
An instrument that transfers real property from one person to another and in which the grantor promises that title is good and clear of any claims
A deed is a written instrument that transfers the title of property from one person to another Although many types of deeds exist, title is usually transferred by a warranty deed A warranty deed provides the greatest protection
to the purchaser because the grantor (seller) pledges or warrants that she legally owns the property and that there are no outstanding liens, mortgages, or other encumbrances against
it A warranty deed is also a guarantee of title, which means that the seller may be held liable for damages if the grantee (buyer) discovers the title is defective
There are two types of warranty deeds: general and special A general warranty deed not only conveys to the grantee all of the grantor’s interest in and title to the property but also guarantees that if the title is defective or has a
“cloud” on it, such as a mortgage claim, tax lien,
310 WARRANTY DEED
Trang 4title claim, judgment, or mechanic’s lien, the
grantee may hold the grantor liable
A special warranty deed conveys the
gran-tor’s title to the grantee and promises to protect
the grantee against title defects or claims
asserted by the grantor and any persons whose
right to assert a claim against the title arose
during the period in which the grantor held
title to the property In a special warranty
deed, the grantor guarantees to the grantee that
the grantor has done nothing during the time he
held title to the property that might in the
future impair the grantee’s title
A warranty deed should contain an accurate
description of the property being conveyed, be
signed and witnessed according to the laws of
the state where the property is located, and be
delivered to the purchaser at closing The deed
should be recorded by the buyers of the
property at the public records office, which is
usually located in the county courthouse
Recording a deed gives “notice to the world”
that a particular piece of property has been sold
Though the grantor guarantees good title in a
warranty deed, the deed is no substitute for title
insurance because a warranty from a grantor
who later dies or goes bankrupt may have little
value
CROSS REFERENCES
Cloud on Title; Property Law; Recording of Land Titles;
Registration of Land Titles; Title Search.
Charles Warren, a prominent lawyer and legal
historian, is best known for his three-volume
study, The Supreme Court in U.S History, which
won the Pulitzer Prize in 1923
Warren was born on March 9, 1868, in
Boston, Massachusetts He attended Harvard
College, receiving his A.B in 1889 He then attended Harvard Law School, graduating in
1892 He was admitted to the bar that same year, and began to practice law in Boston
Warren’s foray into state politics began in
1893, when he became Governor William Eustis Russell’s private secretary The following year,
in 1894, and again in 1895, Warren unsuccess-fully ran for the state senate During this period,
he cofounded the Immigration Restriction League along with fellow Harvard graduates Robert DeCourcy Ward and Prescott Farns-worth Hall The league, which was started in Boston but quickly spread to industrial centers around the United States, was seen as a response
to the perceived threat to the American way of life by the growing numbers of immigrants from various European countries including Ireland, Italy, and Germany The primary purpose of the league was to lobby for restriction of the number of immigrants permitted to enter the United States The league remained active for approximately two decades before Hall died and the organization disbanded
When Russell left the governorship in 1894, Warren became an associate in Russell’s law practice until 1896 He then became a senior attorney in the Boston firm of Warren & Perry, where he practiced from 1897 to 1914 In 1905, Warren received a key appointment, when he became chair of the Massachusetts State Civil Service Commission He served in that capacity until 1911 From there, he moved on to the national political scene
Warren’s work on the commission drew attention from President WOODROW WILSON, who, in 1914, appointed the progressive Demo-crat from Massachusetts assistant attorney
Charles Warren 1868–1954
1868 Born, Boston, Mass.
◆
1892 Graduated from Harvard Law School;
admitted to Massachusetts bar
1897-1914 Senior attorney with Boston law firm, Warren & Perry
◆
1911 History of the American Bar, Colonial and Federal, to 1860 published
◆
1922 The Supreme Court in U.S History published
◆
1923 Won Pulitzer
Prize in history for The Supreme Court in U.S
History
◆
1935 Bankruptcy
in U.S History
published
1954 Died, Washington, D.C.
1914–18 World War I
1939–45 World War II
◆
1929 Stock market crashed;
Great Depression began
1950–53 Korean War
1914–18 Served as U.S assistant attorney general
WARREN, CHARLES 311
Trang 5general of the United States Warren served from 1914 until 1918—the WORLD WAR Iyears
During this time, he developed expertise in the areas of governmental neutrality and INTERNATIONAL LAW He also argued or wrote briefs on 39 cases that were heard by the U.S
Supreme Court
Following the war, Warren remained in Washington, D.C., where he served as aSPECIAL MASTER for the Supreme Court on several original jurisdiction cases involving state boundary lines and WATER RIGHTS He also practiced law and lectured at numerous colleges and law schools throughout the country He became a prolific writer, authoring essays, law journal articles, and nonlegal works, including short stories In addition, Warren wrote several influential books on law andLEGAL HISTORY One
of them, The History of the American Bar, Colonial and Federal, to 1860, published in 1911, traced the development of courts and the legal profession in the American colonies in Part One Part Two looked at the growth of the bar from the beginning of the U.S Supreme Court
to the start of the Civil War
Warren’s reputation as a legal scholar was cemented in 1922, when he published a three-volume set called The Supreme Court in U.S
History, an analysis of each term of the Supreme Court and its most significant decisions between
1789 and 1918 Warren included contempora-neous writings with the cases so that readers could understand how the Court’s decisions were viewed at the time they were issued A monumental work that was still in print in the early 2000s, Warren’s opus was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for history in 1923
Because of his expertise, Warren frequently was consulted by the U.S government during the 1930s For example, the STATE DEPARTMENT sought out his advice on neutrality issues
Warren also continued to publish In 1935,
he released Bankruptcy in U S History
Drawing on a series of lectures he had delivered at Northwestern University Law School, Warren’s book was an historical and constitutional analysis of the topic of BANK-RUPTCYfrom 1793 to 1935 at both the state and federal level
During WORLD WAR II, Warren again was at the fore of international politics Warren retired from public service in the late 1940s He died in Washington, D.C., on August 16, 1954
FURTHER READINGS Charles Warren Center for Studies in American History, Harvard Univ Available online at http://www.fas harvard.edu/~cwc; website home page: http://www.fas harvard.edu (accessed August 27, 2009).
Warren, Charles 1935 Bankruptcy in United States History Reprint, 2009: Charleston, SC: BiblioLife.
WARREN COMMISSION The assassination of President JOHN F.KENNEDY
in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963, was a shocking event that immediately raised ques-tions about the circumstances surrounding the death of the president Those questions in-creased when the alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, was murdered while in the custody of Dallas police on November 25 by JACK RUBY, a Dallas nightclub owner
PresidentLYNDON B.JOHNSON moved quickly
to reassure the nation that a thorough inquiry would take place by creating a commission of distinguished public servants to investigate the evidence On November 29, 1963, Johnson appointedEARL WARREN, chief justice of the U.S SUPREME COURT, to head the commission, which became known as the Warren Commission Its
1964 report, which sought to put to rest many issues, proved controversial, provoking charges
of a whitewash The facts surrounding the Kennedy ASSASSINATION remain the subject of debate
Chief Justice Warren, fearing that his service disrupted the traditional SEPARATION OF POWERS, reluctantly agreed to serve as director of the commission The other members of the com-mission were Senators Richard B Russell of Georgia andJOHN SHERMANCooper of Kentucky; two members of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Hale Boggs of Louisiana, andGERALD R.FORDof Michigan; Allen W Dulles, former head of the CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY; John J McCloy, former head of the WORLD BANK; and James Lee Rankin, former U.S SOLICITOR GENERAL, who was appointed general counsel for the commission
The Warren Commission began its investi-gations on December 3, 1963 The commission used accounts and statements provided by the Dallas police force, the SECRET SERVICE, the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, the military, and government and congressional commis-sions Over the course of ten months, the commission took testimony from 552 witnesses
312 WARREN COMMISSION
Trang 6The commission published its conclusions,
popularly known as the Warren Report, in
September 1964 According to the commission,
Oswald acted alone in the assassination The
commission characterized Oswald as a resentful,
belligerent man who hated authority It
endorsed the “single-bullet theory,” which
concluded that only one bullet, rather than
two, struck President Kennedy and Texas
governor John Connally, who was sitting
directly in front of the president in the open
convertible This was important because it
appeared unlikely that Oswald could have fired
his rifle twice in succession quickly enough to
strike the two men It found no connection
between Oswald’s Communist affiliation (and
time living in the Soviet Union) and theMURDER,
nor between Oswald and his murderer, JACK
RUBY The commission also found no evidence
that Ruby was part of aCONSPIRACY It criticized
the security measures taken to protect Kennedy
and recommended that more effective measures
be taken in the future
Although the conclusions of the
commis-sion were well received at first, public
skepti-cism soon grew about the findings In 1966 two
influential books were published that challenged
the methods and conclusions of the
commis-sion Both Inquest by Edward Jay Epstein and
Rush to Judgment by Mark Lane declared that
the commission had not investigated deeply
enough to produce conclusive results In that
same year, Jim Garrison, a New Orleans district
attorney, stunned the public with his revelations of
a conspiracy and his accusations against
promi-nent businessman Clay Shaw Shaw was tried on
conspiracy charges but was acquitted in 1969
Since the release of the Warren
Commis-sion’s report, thousands of articles and books
have been published promoting various theories
surrounding the assassination A 1979 special
committee of the House of Representatives
re-examined the evidence and concluded that
Kennedy“was probably assassinated as a result
of a conspiracy.” However, the committee’s
conclusion was based on acoustic evidence
suggesting that a fourth shot was fired in the
plaza During the first decade of the 2000s,
however, independent studies conducted with
modern forensic tools have generally shown
that the acoustic evidence was unreliable
Allegations that federal agencies withheld
assassination evidence led Congress to enact the
PresidentJOHN F.KENNEDYAssassination Records Collection Act of 1992 (44 U.S.C.A § 2107)
The act created the Assassination Records Review Board, an independent federal agency that oversees the identification and release of records related to the assassination of President Kennedy The act granted the review board the mandate and the authority to identify, secure, and make available, through the National Archives and Records Administration, records related to Kennedy’s assassination Creation of the review board has allowed the release of thousands of previously secret government documents and files
Research into the Kennedy assassination has led to many theories about what might have happened However, none of this research has led to an accepted conclusion about the assassination other than the one reached in by the Warren Commission
FURTHER READINGS Galanor, Stewart 1998 Cover-Up New York: Kestrel Books.
Kaiser, David 2008 The Road to Dallas: The Assassination of John F Kennedy Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
O ’Neill, William L 1971 Coming Apart: An Informal History
of America in the 1960s New York: Quadrangle Books.
Machine: Lee Harvey Oswald, Life-History, and the Truth of Crime.” Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities
10 (winter).
CROSS REFERENCES President of the United States.
WARREN COURT From 1953 to 1969, EARL WARREN presided as chief justice of the U.S Supreme Court Under Warren’s leadership, the Court actively used
A bipartisan commission was assembled to investigate the assassination of President Kennedy The Warren Commission included (l-r) Rep Gerald
R Ford, Rep Hale Boggs, Sen Richard Russel, Chief Justice Earl Warren, Sen John Sherman Cooper, John McCloy, Allen W Dulles, and
J Lee Rankin.
AP IMAGES
WARREN COURT 313
Trang 7JUDICIAL REVIEW to strictly scrutinize and over-turn state and federal statutes, to apply many provisions of theBILL OF RIGHTSto the states, and
to provide opportunities for those groups in society who had been excluded from the political process During Warren’s tenure, the Court became increasingly liberal and activist, drawing the fire of political and judicial conservatives who believed that the Warren Court had overstepped its constitutional role and had become a legislative body The Warren Court itself became a catalyst for change, initiating reforms rather than res-ponding to pressures applied by other branches
of government
The Warren Court was committed to the promotion of a libertarian and egalitarian society The Court used theSTRICT SCRUTINYtest
of constitutional review to strike down legisla-tion that directly abridged the exercise of fundamental rights or narrowed the number
of people who might exercise them and to invalidate legislation that discriminated on the basis of race, religion, and other suspect classifications Under strict scrutiny, the gov-ernment has the burden of proving that a compelling STATE INTEREST exists for the legisla-tion and that the law was narrowly tailored to minimize the restriction on the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT This burden proved difficult to meet during the Warren Court years, turning the federal courts into institutions that protected the interests of politically unpopular individuals and members of relatively powerless minority groups who had been victimized by pervasive historical, political, economic, and social DISCRIMINATION
Racial Discrimination
The first major decision of the Warren Court was arguably its most important In BROWN V BOARD OF EDUCATION, 347 U.S 483, 74 S Ct 686,
98 L Ed 873 (1954), the Court overruled its
1896 decision of PLESSY V FERGUSON, 163 U.S
537, 16 S Ct 1138, 41 L Ed 256, which had allowed racially segregated facilities on trains and, by implication, in public schools The Court made clear that state-sponsored racial SEGREGATION of public schools was inherently unequal and that it violated the EQUAL PROTEC-TION CLAUSEof theFOURTEENTH AMENDMENT The Brown decision helped trigger the modern CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT During the 1960s, the Warren Court upheld federal civil
rights legislation, including the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
OF 1964 (42 U.S.C.A § 2000a et seq.) and the VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF1965 (42 U.S.C.A § 1973 et seq.) The Court struck down state laws that were racially discriminatory, including statutes that forbade racially mixed marriages The Court applied theTHIRTEENTH AMENDMENT, which abolished SLAVERY, to outlaw all discrimination
in the sale and rental of property and in the making of contracts
Voting and Reapportionment
Apart from upholding the Voting Rights Act of
1965, the Warren Court removed impediments
to voting by striking down state POLL TAX and property qualifications, unreasonable residency requirements, and obstacles to putting third political parties on the ballot
The Court also changed the makeup of state legislatures by reversing precedent and agreeing
to hear legislative reapportionment cases In REYNOLDS V SIMS, 377 U.S 533, 84 S Ct 1362,
12 L Ed 2d 506 (1964), Chief Justice Warren wrote the opinion that has come to be known as the “one person, one vote decision.” Reynolds and a series of cases that followed forced state legislatures to be apportioned equally on the basis of population rather than geographic areas Reapportionment based on population resulted in a shift of political power away from sparsely populated rural areas to metropolitan areas
Criminal Procedure
The Warren Court aroused bitter controversy with its decisions in CRIMINAL PROCEDURE The Court sought to provide equal justice by providing criminal defendants with an attorney
in felony cases if they could not afford one (GIDEON V WAINWRIGHT, 372 U.S 335, 83 S Ct
792, 9 L Ed 2d 799[1963]) It also ruled that indigent defendants could not be denied the opportunity to appeal their cases or to partici-pate fully in post-conviction proceedings be-cause of a lack of funds to obtain the necessary transcripts or to hire counsel
The decision inMIRANDA V.ARIZONA, 384 U.S
436, 86 S Ct 1602, 16 L Ed 2d 694 (1966), proved to be the Warren Court’s most contro-versial criminal procedure case The Court required what has come to be known as the Miranda warning: police must inform arrested persons that they need not answer questions
314 WARREN COURT
Trang 8and that they may have an attorney present
during questioning
In addition, the Court used the Fourteenth
Amendment to incorporate federal constitutional
rights, thus making them applicable to the states
Using this process, the Court applied the
EXCLU-SIONARY RULEto the states This meant that evidence
seized in violation of theFOURTH AMENDMENTcould
not be used in a criminal prosecution InMAPP V
OHIO, 367 U.S 643, 81 S Ct 1684, 6 L Ed 2d 1081,
the Court held that Fourth Amendment
protec-tions extended to the states as well as the federal
government
Under Warren, the Court clarified standards
related to searches and seizures For instance, in
Katz v United States, 389 U.S 347, 88 S Ct
507, 19 L Ed 2d 576 (1967), the Court held
that the Fourth Amendment applied to
tele-phone wiretaps, meaning that such surveillance
requires a warrant upon proof ofPROBABLE CAUSE
that a crime has been or will be committed On
the other hand, the Court also recognized that,
in some instances, probable cause is not
necessary In TERRY V OHIO, 392 U.S 1, 88 S
Ct 1868, 20 L Ed 2d 889 (1968), the Court
held that an officer who suspects a passer-by of
criminal activity maySTOP AND FRISKthe suspect
based on reasonable suspicion rather than
probable cause
The Warren Court also applied to the states
the federal constitutional right againstCRUEL AND
UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT in the EIGHTH AMENDMENT,
theRIGHT TO COUNSELin theSIXTH AMENDMENT, the
right against compelled SELF-INCRIMINATION in
theFIFTH AMENDMENT, and the rights to confront
witnesses and to have a jury trial in all criminal
cases, which are guaranteed by the Sixth
Amendment These decisions radically changed
the criminal justice system and generated
criticism that the Court had gone too far in
protecting the accused
First Amendment
The Warren Court sought to protect FIRST
AMENDMENT rights It invalidated the Georgia
House of Representatives’ exclusion of one of
its members because of his antiwar and
antidraft statements The Court also attacked
vagueness and overbreadth in compulsory
LOYALTY OATHSand ruled against the compulsory
disclosure of organization memberships It
moved to invalidate attempts in southern states
to inhibit the functioning of the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), to make public the identities
of the organization’s members, and to deny its members opportunities for public employment
During the 1960s, the Court upheld the legitimacy of demonstrations at state capitols and in the streets and sit-ins at segregated lunch counters It also upheld the right of individuals
to picket in a privately owned shopping center and the right of high-school students to express their opposition to the VIETNAM WARby wearing black armbands to school
The Warren Court also changed state slander and LIBEL laws that stifled open discussion of controversial issues It held that persons who are public officials or public figures cannot recover damages in aDEFAMATIONaction unless they prove that a false statement was made with “actual malice” (with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false)
The Court in 1969 issued an important case involving the rights of students InTINKER V.DES MOINES INDEPENDENT COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT,
393 U.S 503, 89 S Ct 733, 21 L Ed 2d 731, the Court held that the First Amendment protected two students’ rights to wear armbands in protest
of the Vietnam War This case has continued to apply to First Amendment cases involving students
The Court also reviewed many freedom-of-religion cases, provoking controversy over its interpretation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment The Warren Court struck down Bible reading and the reciting of state-written prayers in public schools, even those religious acts done on a voluntary basis The Court did, however, uphold, with qualifications, state aid to children attending religious schools
As to the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, the Court sought to protect the rights of religious dissenters and nonconformists when it struck down a Maryland constitutional provi-sion requiring the declaration of a belief in God
as a prerequisite to holding public office It also held that an individual need not believe in a supreme being to be eligible for CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR status
Right to Privacy
One of the most significant rulings of the Warren Court was its recognition of the constitutional right of privacy In GRISWOLD V CONNECTICUT, 381 U.S 479, 85 S Ct 1678, 14 L
WARREN COURT 315
Trang 9Ed 2d 510 (1965), the Court struck down a Connecticut statute that prohibited the dissem-ination of BIRTH CONTROL information In declaring the right of privacy, the Court laid the groundwork for the post-Warren Court decision inROE V.WADE, 410 U.S 113, 93 S Ct
705, 35 L Ed 2d 147 (1973), which gave women the right to have anABORTION
FURTHER READINGS Compston, Christine L 2002 Earl Warren: Justice for All.
New York: Oxford Univ Press.
Horwitz, Morton J 1999 The Warren Court and the Pursuit
of Justice New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.
Krotoszynski, Ronald J., Jr 2002 “A Remembrance of Things Past?: Reflections on the Warren Court and the Struggle for Civil Rights.” Washington and Lee Law Review 59 (fall).
Lewis, Frederick P 1999 The Context of Judicial Activism:
The Endurance of the Warren Court Legacy in a Conservative Age.” Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.
Powe, Lucas A 2001 The Warren Court and American Politics Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ Press.
Scheiber, Harry N., ed 2007 Earl Warren and the Warren Court: The Legacy in American and Foreign Law.
Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Schwartz, Bernard, ed 1996 The Warren Court: A Retrospective New York: Oxford Univ Press.
CROSS REFERENCES Apportionment; Baker v Carr; Custodial Interrogation;
Equal Protection; Incorporation Doctrine; Libel and Slander; Mapp v Ohio; New York Times Co v Sullivan;
Overbreadth Doctrine; School Desegregation; Symbolic Speech; Void for Vagueness Doctrine.
Earl Warren served as the 14th chief justice of the U.S Supreme Court from 1953 to 1969 A former PROSECUTOR, state attorney general, and
governor of California, Warren previously had not served as a judge In spite of his lack of judicial experience, Warren led a constitutional revolution that reshaped U.S law and society and granted the lower federal courts wide latitude in enforcing individual constitutional rights Although criticized by conservatives for his judicial activism, Warren has also been hailed as one of the greatest chief justices in U.S history
Warren was born on March 19, 1891, in Los Angeles, California, to Methias H Warren and Crystal Hernlund, both Scandinavian immi-grants, but he moved with his family to Bakersfield, California, as a young boy The son of a railroad worker, Warren worked summers on railroad crews as a young man to earn money to attend college It was in Bakersfield that Warren’s father was murdered during aROBBERY He earned a bachelor’s degree and a law degree from the University of California at Berkeley and was admitted to the California bar in 1914 After a brief period of service in the Army duringWORLD WAR I, Warren returned to northern California where he practiced law for a short time in San Francisco Warren joined the Alameda County district attorney’s office in 1920 and in 1925 was elected district attorney Reelected two times, Warren established a reputation as a tough but fair prosecutor A liberal Republican, he was elected California attorney general in 1938 Though he helped modernize the office during his term as attorney general, Warren’s record was tarnished
by his actions during the early months of U.S involvement inWORLD WAR II
Earl Warren 1891–1974
❖
◆
◆
◆
◆
1891 Born,
Los Angeles, Calif.
1914 Admitted
to Calif bar
1920 Joined Alameda County (Calif.) district attorney's office
1925–39 Served
as district attorney
of Alameda County
1944 Korematsu v United States upheld relocation of Japanese Americans
1954 Wrote unanimous opinion striking down "separate but equal"
education in
Brown v Board
of Education
1948 Ran for vice president on unsuccessful Dewey ticket
1942 Led efforts to relocate West Coast Japanese Americans
1939–43 Served as attorney general of Calif.
1914–18 World War I
1939–45 World War II
1950–53 Korean War
1961–73 Vietnam War
1974 Died, Washington, D.C.
1966 Miranda v Arizona required
the reading of rights now known
as the Miranda warning
1965 Griswold v Connecticut
recognized right to privacy
1964 Wrote "one person, one vote"
opinion in Reynolds v Sims
1953–69 Served as chief justice
of the U.S Supreme Court
◆
1943–53 Served as governor of California
◆
◆
1963 Wrote majority opinion
in Gideon v Wainwright
316 WARREN, EARL
Trang 10In 1942 Warren was a key leader in
demanding the removal of people of Japanese
ancestry from the West Coast At the time,
Warren and others justified the removal of
Japanese Americans on national security
grounds, believing that California was
vulnera-ble to Japanese spies and saboteurs The U.S
Supreme Court, in KOREMATSU V UNITED STATES,
323 U.S 214, 65 S Ct 193, 89 L Ed 194
(1944), upheld the removal Thousands of
Japanese Americans lost their property and
businesses and were “relocated” to
concentra-tion camps for the duraconcentra-tion of the war Warren
defended his actions throughout his public
career, but in retirement he admitted the
relocation was a mistake based on hysteria and
unsubstantiated fears
Warren was elected governor of California
in 1942 and proved a popular political leader
He was reelected with Republican and
DEMO-CRATIC PARTY support in 1946 and 1950
Warren’s only political defeat came in 1948,
when he was the Republican vice-presidential
candidate on the ticket headed by THOMAS E
DEWEYthat lost to PresidentHARRY S.TRUMAN In
1952 he played a key role in securing the
Republican presidential nomination forDWIGHT
D.EISENHOWER, who in return promised Warren
an appointment to the Supreme Court when a
vacancy occurred
When Chief Justice FRED M VINSON died
unexpectedly in September 1953, Eisenhower
appointed Warren as his successor In his first
term as chief justice, Warren confronted the
issue of state-mandated racial SEGREGATION in
public schools The case, which the Court had
heard the previous year but was unable to
decide, came back for reargument In May 1954
Warren wrote the opinion for a unanimous
Court inBROWN V.BOARD OF EDUCATION, 347 U.S
483, 74 S Ct 686, 98 L Ed 873 (1954) Brown
overruled the 1896 Supreme Court decision of
PLESSY V.FERGUSON, 163 U.S 537, 16 S Ct 1138,
41 L Ed 256, which had allowed racially
segregated facilities on trains and by implication
in public schools Writing that “separate
educational facilities are inherently unequal,”
Warren held that racial segregation in Kansas
denied African Americans EQUAL PROTECTION of
the laws
Brown unleashed a torrent of controversy
and protest in the South and immediately
established Warren’s image as a liberal
Throughout the South, billboards appeared that read “Impeach Earl Warren.” Nevertheless, in
1955 the Court ordered Kansas and other states with segregated schools to move with “all deliberate speed” to dismantle their dual school systems The modernCIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENTwas founded in this decision, which radically altered the traditional legal position on RACIAL DISCRIMI-NATION When comprehensive federal CIVIL RIGHTS legislation was enacted in the 1960s, the WARREN COURT easily upheld the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 (42 U.S.C.A § 2000a et seq.) and the VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965 (42 U.S.C.A
§ 1973 et seq.)
The Warren Court was marked by itsSTRICT SCRUTINYof legislation that directly abridged the exercise of fundamental rights or narrowed the number of people who might exercise them, and of legislation that discriminated against various suspect classes The strict scrutiny standard of review shifted to the government the burden of proving a compelling STATE INTEREST that could justify discriminatory legis-lation On most occasions the government could not meet this burden In addition, the Court “read into” the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, applicable to the states, most of the provisions
of theBILL OF RIGHTS, which until then had been applicable only to the federal government
Earl Warren.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
WARREN, EARL 317