Changes

The hippies and others who disliked authority and tradition had help from our court system, and particularly from the "Warren Court."  Just as an "Administration" is named after the president at the time (e.g., the "Truman Administration"), a period of time on the Supreme Court is named after the person who was the Chief Justice at the time (e.g., the "Warren Court" refers the Supreme Court years when Earl Warren was Chief Justice).  

The hippies and others who disliked authority and tradition had help from our court system, and particularly from the "Warren Court."  Just as an "Administration" is named after the president at the time (e.g., the "Truman Administration"), a period of time on the Supreme Court is named after the person who was the Chief Justice at the time (e.g., the "Warren Court" refers the Supreme Court years when Earl Warren was Chief Justice).  

Earl Warren was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1953 based on a political bargain with President Eisenhower.  When Eisenhower was in a close race for the Republican nomination for president in 1952 (against the more conservative Robert Taft), Warren was governor of California and promised the support of the California delegation to Eisenhower if he would promise to appoint Warren to fill the first vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court.  By chance, that first vacancy in 1953 (after Eisenhower was elected president) was the position of Chief Justice, and Warren threatened to speak out against Eisenhower if he did not honor the deal.  Eisenhower then nominated him, and the U.S. Senate confirmed him (approved the nomination by a majority vote).  Warren subsequently became the most "activist" Chief Justice in the history of the Court.

Earl Warren was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1953 based on a political bargain with President Eisenhower.  When Eisenhower was in a close race for the Republican nomination for president in 1952 (against the more conservative Robert Taft), Warren was governor of California and promised the support of the California delegation to Eisenhower if he would promise to appoint Warren to fill the first vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court.  By chance, that first vacancy in 1953 (after Eisenhower was elected president) was the position of Chief Justice, and Warren threatened to speak out against Eisenhower if he did not honor the deal.  Eisenhower then nominated him, and the U.S. Senate confirmed him (approved the nomination by a majority vote).  Warren subsequently became the most "activist" Chief Justice in the history of the Court, meaning that he did not stick to the text of the Constitution or other laws, but instead ruled as he wanted to.

In fact, Chief Justice Earl Warren was probably the most powerful person in all of American politics during his service from 1953 to 1969.  The Warren Court was an "activist court," extending judicial powers into areas where it previously showed restraint.  For example, the Warren Court applied the Bill of Rights against the States, despite their clear language and intent to apply only against the federal government.  On a more controversial level, the Warren Court expanded the power of the Supreme Court and invented many new constitutional rights, while denying the rights of teachers and students to begin class with a prayer.   

Indeed, Chief Justice Earl Warren was probably the most powerful person in all of American politics during his service from 1953 to 1969.  The Warren Court was an "activist court," extending judicial powers into areas where it previously showed restraint.  For example, the Warren Court applied the Bill of Rights against the States, despite their clear language and intent to apply only against the federal government.  On a more controversial level, the Warren Court expanded the power of the Supreme Court and invented many new constitutional rights, while denying the rights of teachers and students to begin class with a prayer.   

The Warren Court is most famous for holding in favor of criminals and restricting the power of law enforcement in dealing with crime.  Three examples of Warren Court decisions in this field are:

The Warren Court is most famous for holding in favor of criminals and restricting the power of law enforcement in dealing with crime.  Three examples of Warren Court decisions in finding implied rights for criminal suspects in the Constitution are:

*''Gideon v. Wainwright'' (1963), requiring States to provide and pay for a defense attorney for any defendant charged with a felony (a felony is a serious crime, as opposed to a minor offense like a traffic ticket).

*''Gideon v. Wainwright'' (1963), requiring States to provide and pay for a defense attorney for any defendant charged with a felony (a felony is a serious crime, as opposed to a minor offense like a traffic ticket).

'''Debate:  Do you think criminal suspects are entitled to these new rights?'''

'''Debate:  Do you think criminal suspects are entitled to these new rights?'''

The greatest damage done by the Warren Court was probably its decision banning official school prayer in public school, which had existed for hundreds of years.  The Lord's Prayer was being said daily in New Jersey public schools, for example, which many students' grandparents might recall.  In ''Engel v. Vitale'' (1962), the Warren Court prohibited this and public schools have been declining ever since; some consider this decision to have been the worst since the ''Dred Scott'' decision just before the Civil War.   

The greatest damage done by the Warren Court was probably its decision banning official school prayer in public school, which had existed for hundreds of years.  The Lord's Prayer was being said daily in many public schools, for example, which many students' grandparents might recall.  In ''Engel v. Vitale'' (1962), the Warren Court prohibited this and public schools have been declining ever since; some consider this decision to have been the worst since the ''Dred Scott'' decision just before the Civil War.   

Liberal Justice Hugo Black, who became known for his judicial hostility to religion and his pro-pornography rulings, wrote the ''Engel v. Vitale'' decision and cited only one precedent (prior judicial authority) in it: a previous decision Justice Black himself had written (''Everson v. Board of Education'').  A study published by ''U.S. News & World Report'' found that in 71 cases before the Supreme Court concerning communists, Justice Black held in favor of the communists every single time.<ref>Phyllis Schlafly, "The Supremacists," p. 151 (2006).</ref>  Hugo Black had been a Democratic U.S. Senator before he was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Liberal Justice Hugo Black, who became known for his judicial hostility to religion, wrote the ''Engel v. Vitale'' decision and cited only one precedent (prior judicial authority) in it: a previous decision Justice Black himself had written (''Everson v. Board of Education'').  A study published by ''U.S. News & World Report'' found that in 71 cases before the Supreme Court concerning communists, Justice Black held in favor of the communists every single time.<ref>Phyllis Schlafly, "The Supremacists," p. 151 (2006).</ref>  Hugo Black had been a Democratic U.S. Senator before he was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Less well known, but also influential, were the deceptively named "one man, one vote" decisions by the Warren Court, which interfered with the structure of state legislatures.  Since the ratification of the Constitution, States had their own legislatures that were modeled after Congress, with one chamber or body based on population (like the House), and the other based on geography (like the Senate).  This worked well for over 150 years.  But the Warren Court decided it did not like that structure, even though Congress uses it.  In ''Baker v. Carr'' (1962) and ''Reynolds v. Sims'' (1964), the United States Supreme Court ruled that state legislative districts must be redrawn to be equal in population, and natural geographic lines caused by rivers or county lines should be ignored in order to draw legislative districts equal in population.  The Warren Court held that ''both'' state legislatures and all their legislative districts must be based on equal populations of voters, which it expected would have a liberal effect by giving cities greater influence.  The result is difficult-to-understand and ever-changing district boundaries (due to population shifts) that render most citizens unaware of who their representatives really are.  The Warren Court could not change the structure of Congress because it is expressly established by the U.S. Constitution.

Less well known, but also influential, were the deceptively named "one man, one vote" decisions by the Warren Court, which interfered with the structure of state legislatures.  Since the ratification of the Constitution, States had their own legislatures that were modeled after Congress, with one chamber or body based on population (like the House), and the other based on geography (like the Senate).  This worked well for over 150 years.  But the Warren Court decided it did not like that structure, even though Congress uses it.  In ''Baker v. Carr'' (1962) and ''Reynolds v. Sims'' (1964), the United States Supreme Court ruled that state legislative districts must be redrawn to be equal in population, and natural geographic lines caused by rivers or county lines should be ignored in order to draw legislative districts equal in population.  The Warren Court held that ''both'' state legislatures and all their legislative districts must be based on equal populations of voters, which it expected would have a liberal effect by giving cities greater influence.  The result is difficult-to-understand and ever-changing district boundaries (due to population shifts) that render most citizens unaware of who their representatives really are.  The Warren Court could not change the structure of Congress because it is expressly established by the U.S. Constitution.