Hugo Black: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
"Before he became a senator" suggests that both things stopped when he became a senator. This is arguably the case for his KKK membership but not for the other.
 
Line 1:
{{Short description|US Supreme Court justice from 1937 to 1971}}
{{Infobox Judge
{{Use mdy dates|date=June 2023}}
| name = Hugo Black
{{Infobox officeholder
| image = HugoLaFayetteBlack.jpg
| imagesizename = Hugo Black
| captionimage = HugoLaFayetteBlack.jpg
| caption = Black in 1937
| office = [[Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States|Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court]]
| office = [[Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States]]
| termstart = [[August 19]] [[1937]]
| termendnominator = [[SeptemberFranklin 17]]D. [[1971Roosevelt]]
| term_start = August 19, 1937<!--Term start date as per www.supremecourt.gov, reflects date oath taken-->
| nominator = [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]]
| term_end = September 17, 1971<ref name=SCOTUSjustices>{{cite web| url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/members_text.aspx| title= Justices 1789 to Present| publisher=Supreme Court of the United States| ___location=Washington, D.C.| access-date=February 15, 2022}}</ref>
| appointer =
| predecessor = [[Willis Van Devanter]]
| successor = [[Lewis FranklinF. Powell, Jr.]]
| office1 = Chair of the [[United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions|Senate Education Committee]]
| office2 =
| termstart2term_start1 = January 3, 1937
| termend2term_end1 = August 19, 1937
| predecessor1 = [[David I. Walsh|David Walsh]]
| nominator2 =
| successor1 = [[Elbert D. Thomas|Elbert Thomas]]
| appointer2 =
| office2 = [[United States Senate Democratic Conference Secretary|Secretary of the Senate Democratic Conference]]
| predecessor2 =
| leader2 = [[Joseph Taylor Robinson]]
| successor2 =
| birthdateterm_start2 = [[February 27]] [[1886]] = 1927
| term_end2 = 1937
| birthplace = [[Harlan, Alabama|Harlan]], [[Alabama]]
| predecessor2 = [[William H. King]]
| deathdate = {{death date and age|1971|09|25|1886|02|27}}
| deathplacesuccessor2 = [[Bethesda,Joshua Maryland|Bethesda]],B. [[MarylandLee]]
| spousejr/sr3 = United States Senator
| state3 = [[Alabama]]
| term_start3 = March 4, 1927
| term_end3 = August 19, 1937
| predecessor3 = [[Oscar Underwood]]
| successor3 = [[Dixie Bibb Graves|Dixie Graves]]
| birth_name = Hugo Lafayette Black
| birth_date = {{birth date|1886|2|27}}
| birth_place = [[Clay County, Alabama|Harlan, Alabama]], U.S. <!--[[Ashland, Alabama]]-->
| death_date = {{nowrap|{{death date and age|1971|9|25|1886|2|27}}}}
| death_place = [[Bethesda, Maryland]], U.S.
| resting_place = [[Arlington National Cemetery]]
| party = [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]]
| spouse = {{plainlist|
* {{marriage|Josephine Foster|1921|1951|end=died}}
* {{marriage|Elizabeth DeMeritte|1957}}
}}
| children = 3, including [[Hugo Black Jr.|Hugo]] and [[Sterling Foster Black|Sterling]]
'''Hugo LaFayette Black''' ([[February 27]], [[1886]]&ndash;[[September 25]], [[1971]]) was an [[Politics of the United States|American politician]] and [[Law of the United States|jurist]]. A member of the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]], Black represented the [[U.S. state|state]] of [[Alabama]] in the [[United States Senate]] from 1926 to 1937, and served as an [[Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States|Associate Justice]] of the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] from 1937 to 1971. Widely regarded as one of the most influential [[List of Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court justices]] in the 20th century, he was nominated by [[President of the United States|President]] [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] and [[advice and consent|confirmed]] by the Senate by a vote of 63 to 13.
| education = [[University of Alabama Law School|University of Alabama]] ([[Bachelor of Laws|LLB]])
| allegiance = United States
| branch = [[United States Army]]
| rank = [[Captain (United States O-3)|Captain]]
| unit = [[81st Field Artillery Regiment]]
| battles = [[World War I]]
| serviceyears = 1917–1919
| signature = Hugo L. Black signature.svg
| footnotes = <ref name=encyclopedia>{{cite web |url=http://encyclopediaofalabama.org/article/h-1848 |access-date=September 25, 2020 |title=Hugo L. Black |author-link=Steve Suitts |first=Steve |last=Suitts |website=[[Encyclopedia of Alabama]] |archive-date=March 1, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150301162840/http://encyclopediaofalabama.org/article/h-1848 |url-status=live }}</ref>
}}
'''Hugo Lafayette Black''' (February 27, 1886 – September 25, 1971) was an American lawyer, politician, and jurist who served as a [[U.S. Senator]] from [[Alabama]] from 1927 to 1937 and as an [[Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States|associate justice]] of the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] from 1937 to 1971. A member of the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]] and a devoted [[New Deal]]er,<ref>Newman, ''Hugo Black'', pp. 195, 209, 228.</ref> Black endorsed [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] in both the [[1932 United States presidential election|1932]] and [[1936 United States presidential election|1936]] presidential elections.<ref name="Ball (2006)">Ball, Howard. ''Hugo L. Black: Cold Steel Warrior''. Oxford University Press. 1996. {{ISBN|0-19-507814-4}}</ref>
 
Early in his life, Black espoused [[anti-Catholic]] views and was a member of the [[Ku Klux Klan]]. An article from the ''Pittsburgh Post-Gazette'' reported that he temporarily resigned from the Klan in 1925 to bolster his senatorial campaign, before quietly rejoining in 1926.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://pgdigs.tumblr.com/image/30869087306|title=The Digs: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Photo|website=The Digs: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette|language=en-US|access-date=July 7, 2017|archive-date=March 17, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180317171914/http://pgdigs.tumblr.com/image/30869087306|url-status=live}}</ref> In 1937, upon being appointed to the Supreme Court, Black said: "Before becoming a Senator I dropped the Klan. I have had nothing to do with it since that time. I abandoned it. I completely discontinued any association with the organization."<ref name="I Quit Klan: Black's Defense">{{Cite web |url=http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1937/10/02/page/1/article/i-quit-klan-blacks-defense |title=I Quit Klan: Black's Defense |date=October 2, 1937 |work=[[Chicago Tribune]] |access-date=July 7, 2017 |archive-date=August 31, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160831051055/http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1937/10/02/page/1/article/i-quit-klan-blacks-defense/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Eschner |first=Kat |date=27 February 2017 |title=This Supreme Court Justice Was a KKK Member |url=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/supreme-court-justice-was-kkk-member-180962254/ |access-date=2024-10-16 |website=[[Smithsonian Magazine]]}}</ref>
The fourth longest-serving justice in Supreme Court history, Black is noted for his advocacy of a literal reading of the [[United States Constitution]] and of the position that the liberties guaranteed in the [[United States Bill of Rights|Bill of Rights]] were imposed on the states ("incorporated") by the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]]. His jurisprudence has been the focus of much discussion. Because of his insistence on a strict textual analysis of Constitutional issues, as opposed to the process-oriented jurisprudence of many of his colleagues, it is difficult to characterize Black as a [[American liberalism|liberal]] or a [[American conservatism|conservative]] as those terms are generally understood in the current political discourse of the United States. On the one hand, his literal reading of the Bill of Rights and his [[Incorporation (Bill of Rights)|theory of incorporation]] often translated into support for strengthening [[civil rights]] and [[civil liberties]]. On the other hand, Black consistently opposed the doctrine of [[substantive due process]] and believed that there was no constitutionally-protected [[right to privacy]].
 
Black served as the secretary of the Senate Democratic Conference and the chair of the Senate Education Committee during his decade in the Senate. Having gained a reputation in the Senate as a reformer, Black was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Roosevelt and [[Advice and consent|confirmed]] by the Senate by a vote of 63 to 16 (six Democratic Senators and ten Republican Senators voted against him). He was the first of nine [[Franklin D. Roosevelt Supreme Court candidates|Roosevelt appointees to the court]],<ref>Henry J. Abraham, ''Justices and Presidents: A Political History of Appointments to the Supreme Court'' (1992).</ref> and he outlasted all except for [[William O. Douglas]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thebestlinks.com/List_of_Justices_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States.html|title=List of Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court |access-date=April 29, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060110154855/http://www.thebestlinks.com:80/List_of_Justices_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States.html |archive-date=January 10, 2006 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
 
The fifth [[List of United States Supreme Court justices by time in office|longest-serving justice in Supreme Court history]], Black was one of the most influential Supreme Court justices in the 20th century.<ref>{{cite web |title=Hugo L. Black |url=https://www.oyez.org/justices/hugo_l_black |website=Oyez|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230306224926/https://www.oyez.org/justices/hugo_l_black|archive-date=March 6, 2023}}</ref> He is noted for using historical evidence to support [[textualist]] arguments, his position that the liberties guaranteed in the [[United States Bill of Rights|Bill of Rights]] were imposed on the states ("incorporated") by the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]], and his absolutist stance on the [[First Amendment]], often declaring "No law [abridging the freedom of speech] means no law."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Tribe |first1=Laurence |title=American Constitutional Law |page=1160 |quote=Whether the Black-Rutledge version is accurate history has been disputed vigrously off the Court, as we shall momentarily see; what is indisputable is that, with remarkable consensus, later Courts accepted the perspective of these Justices as historical truth.}}</ref><ref name="I Quit Klan: Black's Defense"/> Black expanded individual rights in his opinions in cases such as ''[[Gideon v. Wainwright]]'', ''[[Engel v. Vitale]]'', and ''[[Wesberry v. Sanders]]''.
 
Black's views were not uniformly liberal. During [[World War II]], he wrote the majority opinion in ''[[Korematsu v. United States]]'' (1944), which upheld the [[internment of Japanese Americans]] ordered by the president [[Franklin Roosevelt]]. During the mid-1960s, Black became slightly more conservative.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Cohen |first1=Adam |title=Supreme Inequality |date= 2021 |isbn=978-0735221529 |page=19 |publisher=Penguin |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yTWaDwAAQBAJ&q=Hugo%20Black |access-date=April 10, 2022}}</ref> Black opposed the doctrine of [[substantive due process]] (the pre-1937 Supreme Court's interpretation of this concept made it impossible for the government to enact legislation that conservatives claimed interfered with the freedom of business owners),<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|107–108}} and believed that there was no basis in the words of the Constitution for a [[right to privacy]], voting against finding one in ''[[Griswold v. Connecticut]]'' (1965).<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|241–242}} He also took conservative positions in cases such as ''[[Shapiro v. Thompson]]'', ''[[Goldberg v. Kelly]]'', ''[[Tinker v. Des Moines]]'', and ''[[Cohen v. California]]'' where he distinguished between "[[pure speech]]" and "[[Symbolic speech|expressive conduct]]".
 
==Early years==
Hugo LaFayette Black was born in Harlan, [[Clay County, Alabama|Clay County]], Alabama, on February 27, 1886, the youngest of the eight children ofborn to William Lafayette Black and Martha (Toland) Black. HeIn was1890 bornthe onfamily [[Februarymoved 27]]to [[1886Ashland, Alabama|Ashland]], the county seat.<ref name=encyclopedia/> <!-- in a small wooden farmhouse in [[HarlanAshland, Alabama|Harlan]], [[Alabama]], a poor, isolated rural [[Clay County, Alabama|Clay County]] town in the [[Appalachian Mountains|Appalachian]] foothills.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}} --> The family came from a [[foothillBaptist]]s background.<ref>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=GNKBDwAAQBAJ&q=baptist | isbn=978-1588383976 | title=Hugo Black of Alabama: How His Roots and Early Career Shaped the Great Champion of the Constitution | date= 2018 | publisher=NewSouth Books }}</ref>
 
Black attended [[Ashland College]], an academy located in Ashland, then enrolled at the [[University of Alabama School of Law]]. He graduated in 1906 with an [[Bachelor of Laws|LL.B.]] degree, was [[Admission to the bar in the United States|admitted to the bar]], and began to practice in Ashland. In 1907, Black moved to the growing city of [[Birmingham]], where he built a successful practice that specialized in [[labor law]] and [[tort law|personal injury]] cases.<ref name=encyclopedia/>
 
As a consequence of his defense of an [[African Americans|African American]] who was forced into [[Convict leasing|a form of commercial slavery]] after incarceration, Black was befriended by A. O. Lane, a judge connected with the case. When Lane was elected to the Birmingham City Commission in 1911, he asked Black to serve as a police court judge{{snd}}his only judicial experience prior to the Supreme Court. In 1912, Black resigned to return to practicing law full time. In 1914, he began a four-year term as the [[Jefferson County, Alabama|Jefferson County]] [[prosecutor|Prosecuting Attorney]].<ref name=encyclopedia/>
 
During [[World War I]], Black resigned to join the [[United States Army]]. He served in the [[81st Field Artillery Regiment|81st Field Artillery]], and attained the rank of [[Captain (United States O-3)|captain]] as the regimental adjutant. When the regiment departed for France, its commander was ordered to return to [[Fort Sill]] to organize and train another regiment, and he requested Black as his adjutant. The war ended before Black's new unit departed the United States, and he returned to law practice.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges/black-hugo-lafayette |work=Federal Judicial Center |title=Black, Hugo Lafayette |access-date=September 3, 2020 |archive-date=August 9, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809150530/https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges/black-hugo-lafayette |url-status=live }}</ref> He joined the Birmingham [[Civitan International|Civitan]] Club during this time, eventually serving as president of the group.<ref>{{cite book |last=Leonhart |first=James Chancellor |title=The Fabulous Octogenarian |year=1962 |publisher=Redwood House, Inc. |___location=Baltimore, Maryland |page=139}}</ref> He remained an active member throughout his life, occasionally contributing articles to Civitan publications.<ref>{{cite book |last=Armbrester |first=Margaret E. |title=The Civitan Story |year=1992 |publisher=Ebsco Media |___location=Birmingham, AL |page=56}}</ref>
Because his brother Orlando had become a medical doctor, Hugo decided at first to follow in his footsteps. At age seventeen, he left school in [[Ashland, Alabama|Ashland]] and enrolled in the 1902–03 term at Birmingham Medical School. However, it was Orlando who suggested that Hugo should enroll at the [[University of Alabama School of Law]]. After graduating in June 1906, he moved back to Ashland and established a legal practice above a [[grocery]]. His legal practice was not a success, and a year and a half after it had opened, the entire building burned to the ground. Black then moved back to Birmingham in 1907 to continue his law practice, and came to specialize in [[labor law]] and [[tort law|personal injury]] cases.
 
===Ku Klux Klan===
Following his defense of an African American forced into a form of commercial slavery following incarceration, Black was befriended by [[A. O. Lane]], a judge connected with the case. When Lane was elected to the Birmingham City Commission in 1911, he asked Black to serve as a police court judge, an experience that would be his only judicial experience prior to the Supreme Court. In 1912, Black resigned that seat in order to return to practicing law full-time. He was not done with public service; in 1914, he began a four-year term as the [[Jefferson County, Alabama|Jefferson County]] [[prosecutor|Prosecuting Attorney]].
{{further|Hugo Black#Ku Klux Klan and anti-Catholicism}}
 
In the early 1920s, Black became a member of the [[Ku Klux Klan|Robert E. Lee Klan No. 1]] in Birmingham. He resigned in 1925,<ref name=vanderveer/> in order to run for the U.S. Senate, but quietly rejoined the next year.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://pgdigs.tumblr.com/image/30869087306|title=The Digs: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Photo|website=The Digs: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette|language=en-US|access-date=July 7, 2017|archive-date=March 17, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180317171914/http://pgdigs.tumblr.com/image/30869087306|url-status=live}}</ref>
Three years later, during [[World War I]], Black resigned in order to join the [[United States Army]]. He enrolled in the [[Officer Training School|Officers Training School]] at [[Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia]], eventually reaching the rank of [[captain]]. He served in the 81st Field Artillery Unit near [[Chattanooga, Tennessee]], but never participated in armed combat. In September 1918, shortly before the war ended, he returned to his practice in Birmingham.<ref>[http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=181 Federal Judicial Center. "Black, Hugo Lafayette."]</ref>
 
Scholars and biographers have recently examined Black's role in the Klan. Anti-Catholicism was a main concern of the Alabama Klan, and Howard Ball finds that Black "sympathized with the group's economic, nativist, and [[anti-Catholic]] beliefs".{{sfn|Ball|1996|p=16}} Newman says Black "disliked the [[Catholic Church]] as an institution" and gave over 100 anti-Catholic speeches to KKK meetings across Alabama in his 1926 election campaign.<ref>Newman, Roger K. (1997). ''Hugo Black: A Biography''. pp. 87, 104 {{ISBN?}}</ref> Black was elected US senator in 1926 as a Democrat, having built his political career on fighting Catholicism.<ref>Bermen, Daniel M. Berman (1959) "Hugo L. Black: The Early Years". ''Catholic University Law Review''. 8 (2): 103–116 [https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3011&context=lawreview online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240311192410/https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3011&context=lawreview |date=March 11, 2024 }}.</ref>
On [[February 23]] [[1921]], he married Josephine Foster (1899-1951), with whom he would have three children: Hugo (b. 1922), Sterling Foster (b. 1924), and Martha Josephine (b. 1933). The couple remained married until Josephine died after a long illness on [[December 6]] [[1951]]. In 1957, Black married [[Elizabeth Seay DeMeritte]].
 
In 1937 President [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] appointed Black to the Supreme Court without knowing how active he had been in the Klan in the 1920s. He was confirmed by his fellow senators in before the full KKK connection was known..{{sfn|Ball|1996|p=96}}
==Ku Klux Klan controversy==
In the 1920s, the [[Ku Klux Klan]], revived after a half century of dormancy due in part to the release of ''[[The Birth of a Nation]]'', became a dominant force in the politics of Alabama, as well as the politics of much of the rest of the South and several [[Northern United States|Northern states]] and the national Democratic Party. In those years, there were as many as 85,000 members of the Ku Klux Klan in Alabama, where it often wielded substantial influence over the state's elections.
 
After his confirmation, it was reported he had been given a "grand passport" in 1926, granting him life membership in the Klan.<ref name=vanderveer/> In response to this news, Black said he had never used the passport and had not kept it.<ref name="Reimann">{{cite web |url=https://timeline.com/hugo-black-justice-klan-4877fcf6ac75 |title=A U.S. Supreme Court justice was in the Ku Klux Klan – and he remained on the bench for 34 years |last=Reimann |first=Matt |date=August 15, 2017 |website=Timeline.com |publisher=[[Medium (website)|Medium Corporation]] |___location=San Francisco, CA |access-date=September 22, 2021 |archive-date=February 8, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210208094357/https://timeline.com/hugo-black-justice-klan-4877fcf6ac75 |url-status=live }}</ref> He further stated that when he resigned he completely discontinued his Klan association, that he had never resumed it, and that he expected never to resume his membership.<ref name="Reimann"/> He said: "Before becoming a Senator I dropped the Klan. I have had nothing to do with it since that time. I abandoned it. I completely discontinued any association with the organization."<ref name="I Quit Klan: Black's Defense">{{Cite web |url=http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1937/10/02/page/1/article/i-quit-klan-blacks-defense |title=I Quit Klan: Black's Defense |date=October 2, 1937 |work=[[Chicago Tribune]] |access-date=July 7, 2017 |archive-date=August 31, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160831051055/http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1937/10/02/page/1/article/i-quit-klan-blacks-defense/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Eschner |first=Kat |date=27 February 2017 |title=This Supreme Court Justice Was a KKK Member |url=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/supreme-court-justice-was-kkk-member-180962254/ |access-date=2024-10-16 |website=[[Smithsonian Magazine]]}}</ref>
On [[August 11]], [[1921]], Black was asked to defend the [[Reverend]] Edwin R. Stephenson, a Klansman who had been accused of shooting to death [[Rev.]] [[James Coyle]], leader of the large [[Catholic]] community at Saint Paul's Parish in Birmingham, in a trial where the presiding judge, as well as several members of the jury, were Klansmen. Black is reported to have approached prosecution witnesses with the question "You're a Catholic, aren't you?" in an attempt to discredit them before the Klan-dominated jury.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} The jury ultimately acquitted Stephenson. Some scholars, such as Daniel L. Dreisbach of the American University, believe that Hugo Black's later support for a separation of church and state was based on such an anti-Catholic animus.
 
===Personal life===
Black became a member of the ''[[Robert E. Lee]] Klan No. 1'', a branch of the Ku Klux Klan in Birmingham, in 1923.<ref name="VanDeer1">[http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1968/3/1968_3_60.shtml Van Der Veer, Virginia. "Hugo Black and the KKK."]</ref> He claimed that he remained in the KKK only until 1925, and that during that time attended no more than four meetings before his resignation. However, in 1926, he not only attended a State Convention of the KKK but addressed the delegates as well. The published version of the ''Hugo Black Symposium'' reports, "Some of those who knew [Black] offered additional reasons for his joining. Herman Beck, a leading [[Jewish]] merchant in Birmingham encouraged his young friend Black to become a Klansman so that he could help contain the trouble-making element just coming to the fore of the organization in Alabama."<ref>Van Der Veer, Virginia. (1978). ''Hugo Black and the Bill of Rights: Proceedings of the First Hugo Black Symposium in American History on 'The Bill of Rights and American Democracy.' '' University, AL: University of Alabama Press.</ref>
On February 23, 1921, Black married Josephine Foster, with whom he had three children: [[Hugo L. Black, II]] (1922–2013), an attorney; [[Sterling Foster Black|Sterling Foster]] (1924–1996), and Martha Josephine (1933–2019). Josephine died in 1951; in 1957, Black married Elizabeth Seay DeMeritte.<ref>{{cite news |title=Justice Black At Home |author-link=Edwin M. Yoder |date=March 16, 1986 |first=Edwin M. Jr. |last=Yoder |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=September 25, 2020 |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/entertainment/books/1986/03/16/justice-black-at-home/97157a2d-b863-4f6f-a176-12e4ca40d72d/}} Book review of ''Mr. Justice and Mrs. Black''; The Memoirs of Hugo L. Black and Elizabeth Black.</ref>
 
==Senate career==
[[File:Senator Hugo Black (1886 –1971).jpg|thumb|upright=0.8|right|Black during his Senate tenure]]
{{Infobox_Senator
In 1926, Black sought election to the [[United States Senate]] from Alabama, following the retirement of Senator [[Oscar Underwood]]. Since the Democratic Party had dominated Alabama politics since [[Disfranchisement after Reconstruction era|disenfranchising most blacks]] (and Republicans) at the turn of the century, Black easily defeated his Republican opponent, [[E. H. Dryer]], winning 80.9% of the white vote. He was reelected in 1932, winning 86.3% of the vote against Republican [[J. Theodore Johnson]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/congress/senate1.txt|title=Carr, Adam. "Direct Elections to the United States Senate 1914–98.|access-date=February 18, 2006|archive-date=February 16, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060216121148/http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/congress/senate1.txt|url-status=live}}</ref> Senator Black gained a reputation as a tenacious investigator. In 1934, he chaired the committee that looked into the contracts awarded to air mail carriers under Postmaster General [[Walter Folger Brown]], an inquiry which led to the [[Air Mail scandal]]. To correct what he termed abuses of "fraud and collusion" resulting from the Air Mail Act of 1930, he introduced the Black–McKellar Bill, later the Air Mail Act of 1934. The following year he participated in a Senate committee's investigation of [[lobbying]] practices. He publicly denounced the "highpowered, deceptive, telegram-fixing, letterframing, Washington-visiting" lobbyists, and advocated legislation requiring them to publicly register their names and salaries.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.senate.gov/legislative/common/briefing/Byrd_History_Lobbying.htm|title=U.S. Senate: Lobbyists|website=senate.gov|access-date=February 16, 2018|archive-date=September 1, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170901072932/https://www.senate.gov/legislative/common/briefing/Byrd_History_Lobbying.htm|url-status=live}}</ref>
| name=Hugo LaFayette Black |
| image name=Senator Hugo Black.jpg
| jr/sr=United States Senator
| state=[[Alabama]]
| term= [[March 4]], [[1927]]-[[August 19]], [[1937]]
| preceded= [[Oscar W. Underwood]]
| succeeded= [[Dixie B. Graves]]
| date of birth= [[February 27]], [[1886]]
| place of birth= [[Ashland, Alabama]]
| date of death= [[September 25]], [[1971]]
| place of death= [[Bethesda, Maryland]]
| spouse= Josephine Foster, Elizabeth Seay DeMeritte
| profession=[[attorney]]
| religion=[[Baptist]]
| party=[[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]]
|}}
 
In 1935, during the [[Great Depression]], Black became chairman of the Senate Committee on Education and Labor, a position he would hold for the remainder of his Senate career. On August 8, 1935, Black, who was chairman of the senate committee investigating lobbying activities, went on NBC's ''National Radio Forum''. The national audience was shocked to hear Black speak of a $5{{nbsp}}million electric industry lobbying campaign attempt to defeat the Wheeler–Rayburn bill, known as the [[Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935]] that had passed in July. The act directed the [[Securities and Exchange Commission]] to close down the country's corrupt electric holding companies. Black gave a dramatic speech on this four-decade-long political battle.<ref>{{cite web |title=Black Describes Lobby Inquiry Tells Radio Audience "You Will Pay Bill" in Increased Utility Rates. |url=https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1935-08-09/ed-1/seq-12/#date1=1935&index=4&rows=20&words=Rayburn+Rayburn-Wheeler+Wheeler+Wheeler-Rayburn&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1936&proxtext=wheeler-rayburn&y=7&x=16&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1 |website=Chronicling America Library of Congress |date=August 9, 1935 |access-date=August 11, 2019 |archive-date=August 2, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200802213426/https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1935-08-09/ed-1/seq-12/#date1=1935&index=4&rows=20&words=Rayburn+Rayburn-Wheeler+Wheeler+Wheeler-Rayburn&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1936&proxtext=wheeler-rayburn&y=7&x=16&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1 |url-status=live }}</ref>
In 1926, Black sought election to the [[United States Senate]] from Alabama, following the retirement of Senator [[Oscar Underwood]]. Since the Democratic Party dominated Alabama politics at the time, he easily defeated his Republican opponent, [[E. H. Dryer]], winning 80.9% of the vote. He was reelected in 1932, winning 86.3% of the vote against Republican [[J. Theodore Johnson]].<ref>[http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/congress/senate1.txt Carr, Adam. "Direct Elections to the United States Senate 1914-98.]</ref>
 
Critics of Black's lobbying committee in leading newspapers, such as the ''[[Washington Post]]'' and ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'', described his investigative methods as both "inquisitorial" and "terroristic" and charged that his goal was to intimidate and silence anti-New Dealers. Most controversially, Black, with the backing of the Roosevelt administration, sought to get FCC to order Western Union and other telegraph companies to provide access to copies to several million telegrams sent during the period of February 1 to September 1, 1935. Committee and FCC staffers examined the telegrams at the rate of several thousand per day. The committee's goal was to uncover content that had bearing on lobbying, which it defined very broadly to include just about any political commentary. People who had their private telegrams examined included every member of Congress as well as leaders of anti-New Deal organizations. When Black's investigation of these telegrams became public knowledge, there was a major outcry in the press. On March 11, 1936, Chief Justice [[Alfred A. Wheat]] of the [[Supreme Court of the District of Columbia]] (later renamed the District Court of D.C.) granted an injunction prohibiting the committee from any further examination of more telegrams on the grounds that they secured though against unreasonable search and seizure.<ref>{{cite book | last=Beito | first=David T. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kjvazwEACAAJ|title=The New Deal's War on the Bill of Rights: The Untold Story of FDR's Concentration Camps, Censorship, and Mass Surveillance | edition=First | pages=15–35| ___location=Oakland | publisher=Independent Institute | year=2023 | isbn=978-1598133561}}</ref>
Senator Black gained a reputation as a tenacious and talented investigator. In 1934, for example, he chaired the committee that looked into the contracts awarded to air mail carriers under Postmaster General [[Walter Folger Brown]], an inquiry which uncovered the [[Air Mail Scandal]]. In order to correct these abuses, he introduced the Black-McKellar Bill, later the Air Mail Act of 1934. The following year he participated in a Senate committee's investigation of [[lobbying]] practices. He publicly denounced the "highpowered, deceptive, telegram-fixing, letterframing, Washington-visiting" lobbyists, and advocated legislation requiring them to publicly register their names and salaries.<ref>[http://www.senate.gov/legislative/common/briefing/Byrd_History_Lobbying.htm United States Senate. "Lobbyists."]</ref>
 
In 1935,1937 Blackhe became [[chairman]] ofsponsored the SenateBlack–Connery CommitteeBill, onwhich Educationsought andto Labor,establish a positionnational he[[minimum wouldwage]] holdand fora themaximum remainderworkweek of histhirty Senate careerhours.<ref Inname="ref1">{{cite 1937web he|url=https://www.dol.gov/general/aboutdol/history/flsa1938 sponsored|title=U.S. theDepartment Black-Conneryof Bill,Labor which soughtHistory to establishFair aLabor nationalStandards [[minimumAct wage]]of and1938 a|publisher=Dol.gov maximum|access-date=March workweek21, of2019 forty|archive-date=March hours21, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190321142400/https://www.dol.gov/general/aboutdol/history/flsa1938 |url-status=live }}</ref> Although the bill was initially rejected in the House of Representatives, aan weakenedamended version of it, which extended Black's original maximum workweek proposal to forty-four hours,<ref name="ref1"/> was passed in 1938 (after Black left the Senate), becoming known as the [[Fair Labor Standards Act]].<ref name="ref1"/>
 
Black was an ardent supporter of President [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] and the [[New Deal]].<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|91}} In particular, he was an outspoken advocate of the [[Judiciary Reorganization Bill of 1937]], popularly known as the court-packing bill, FDR's unpopular and unsuccessful plan to stackexpand athe hostilenumber Supremeof Courtseats inon histhe favorSupreme byCourt.<ref addingname="Ball more(2006)" associate justices./>{{rp|90–91}}
 
Throughout his career as a senator, Black gave speeches based on his belief in the ultimate power of the Constitution.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|106}} He came to see the actions of the anti-New Deal Supreme Court as judicial excess; in his view, the court was improperly overturning legislation that had been passed by large majorities in Congress.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{Page needed|date=December 2020}}
==Supreme Court career==
Soon after the failure of the [[court-packing]] plan, President Roosevelt obtained his first opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court Justice when conservative [[Willis Van Devanter]] retired. On [[August 12]], 1937, Roosevelt nominated Black to fill the vacancy. By tradition, a senator nominated for an executive or judicial office was confirmed immediately and without debate. However, when Black was nominated, the Senate departed from this tradition for the first time since 1888; instead of confirming him immediately, it referred the nomination to the [[United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary|Judiciary Committee]].
 
During his Senate career, Black consistently opposed the passage of anti-[[Lynching in the United States|lynching]] legislation, as did all of the white Democrats of the [[Solid South]].<ref>{{cite news |url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=rvVPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=NlUDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4947%2C346735 |title=Foes Seek to Block Mob Law |newspaper=The Evening Independent |___location=St. Petersburg, Florida |date=November 15, 1937 |page=22 |access-date=March 22, 2014 |archive-date=March 12, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160312051018/https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=rvVPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=NlUDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4947%2C346735 |url-status=live }}</ref> In 1935 Black led a filibuster of the Wagner-Costigan anti-lynching bill.<ref>{{cite book |last=Baker |first=Bruce E. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nld1UsRs7c4C&pg=PA99 |title=What Reconstruction Meant: Historical Memory in the American South |page=99 |publisher=University of Virginia Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0813926605 |access-date=March 22, 2014 |archive-date=May 3, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210503234050/https://books.google.com/books?id=nld1UsRs7c4C&pg=PA99 |url-status=live }}</ref> The ''[[Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]]'' reported that when a motion to end the filibuster was defeated, "[t]he southerners—headed by [[Tom Connally]] of Texas and Hugo Black of Alabama—grinned at each other and shook hands."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=QYhRAAAAIBAJ&pg=4505,6409487|title=Pittsburgh Post-Gazette|via=Google News Archive Search|access-date=September 3, 2020|archive-date=May 3, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210503234049/https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=QYhRAAAAIBAJ&pg=4505,6409487|url-status=live}}</ref>
Republican Senator [[Warren Austin]], himself a member of that committee, objected to Black's nomination on constitutional grounds. [[United States Constitution#Article I|Article I, Section 6]] of the [[United States Constitution]] provides that "No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time." In other words, senators and representatives may not resign to take newly created offices or higher-paying political offices; rather, they must wait until the conclusion of their terms. Austin argued that since retirement benefits for Supreme Court Justices over 70 had recently been increased, Black was constitutionally barred from taking the post. Black's defenders responded that he was then 51 and would not receive the increased pension until he turned seventy — long after his senatorial term would have expired. Ultimately, Austin's objections were set aside, and the Judiciary Committee recommended Black's confirmation by a vote of 13–4 on [[August 16]] of that year.<ref name="VanDeer1"/>
 
==Appointment to the Supreme Court==
The next day the full Senate considered Black's nomination. Rumors relating to Black's involvement in the Ku Klux Klan surfaced, and Democratic Senators [[Royal S. Copeland]] and [[Edward R. Burke]] urged the Senate to defeat the nomination. However, no conclusive evidence of Black's involvement was available at the time, so after six hours of debate, the Senate voted 63-13 to confirm Black.<ref name="VanDeer1"/> He resigned from the Senate and was sworn in as an Associate Justice three days later. Alabama Governor [[Bibb Graves]] appointed his wife, [[Dixie Bibb Graves|Dixie B. Graves]], to fill Black's vacated seat.
[[File:Black day (NBY 1725).jpg|thumb|1937 poster protesting Black's appointment as Associate Supreme Court Justice due to his Klan background]]
Soon after the failure of the [[Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937|court-packing]] plan, President Roosevelt obtained his first opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court justice when conservative [[Willis Van Devanter]] retired. Roosevelt wanted the replacement to be a "thumping, evangelical New Dealer" who was reasonably young, confirmable by the Senate, and from a region of the country unrepresented on the court.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|90}} The three final candidates were Solicitor General [[Stanley Forman Reed|Stanley Reed]], [[Sherman Minton]], and Hugo Black.<ref name="Ball (2006)" /> Roosevelt said Reed "had no fire", and Minton did not want the appointment at the time.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}} The position would go to Black, a candidate from the South, who, as a senator, had voted for all 24 of Roosevelt's major New Deal programs.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{Page needed|date=December 2020}} Roosevelt admired Black's use of the investigative role of the Senate to shape the American mind on reforms, his strong voting record, and his early support, which dated back to 1933.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|92}} Both Reed and Minton were later appointed to the Supreme Court; Reed was the next Justice appointed by Roosevelt,<ref>{{cite news |date=January 26, 1938 |title=Senate Quickly Confirms Reed Nomination |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1938/01/26/archives/senate-quickly-confirms-reed-nomination-new-justice-is-expected-to.html |work=[[The New York Times]] |access-date=April 23, 2020 |archive-date=August 18, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200818173836/https://www.nytimes.com/1938/01/26/archives/senate-quickly-confirms-reed-nomination-new-justice-is-expected-to.html |url-status=live }}</ref> while Minton was appointed by [[Harry S. Truman|Harry Truman]] in 1949.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.michaelariens.com/ConLaw/justices/minton.htm|author=Ariens, Michael|title=Sherman Minton biography|access-date=April 26, 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100714223420/http://www.michaelariens.com/ConLaw/justices/minton.htm|archive-date=July 14, 2010}}</ref>
 
On August 12, 1937, Roosevelt nominated Black to fill the vacancy.<ref name=RL33225>{{cite report| last=McMillion| first=Barry J.| date=March 8, 2022| title=Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 to 2020: Actions by the Senate, the Judiciary Committee, and the President| url=https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33225.pdf| publisher=Congressional Research Service| ___location=Washington, D.C.| access-date=April 3, 2022}}</ref> By tradition, a senator nominated for an executive or judicial office was confirmed immediately and without debate.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|94}} However, on this occasion, the nomination was referred to the [[United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary|Judiciary Committee]]. Black was criticized for his presumed bigotry, his cultural roots, and his Klan membership, when that became public.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|94–95}} But Black was a close friend of [[Walter Francis White]], the black executive secretary of the [[NAACP]], who helped assuage critics of the appointment. ''[[Chambers v. Florida]]'' (1940), an early case where Black ruled in favor of African-American criminal defendants who experienced due process violations, later helped put these concerns to rest.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|104–105}}
The next month, the ''[[Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]]'' investigated Black's KKK past. [[Ray Sprigle]] won a [[Pulitzer Prize]] for his series of articles revealing Black's involvement in the Klan. Facing an inflamed public, Black delivered a nationally broadcast radio address in which he explained his decision to join and subsequently resign from the KKK.<ref name="VanDeer1"/> Despite this address, press criticism continued. However, the controversy soon subsided, in part because Justice Black quickly established a record sympathetic to African Americans and the civil rights movement. ''[[Chambers v. Florida]]'' (1940), where he ruled in favor of African American defendants put most of those concerns to rest.
 
The Judiciary Committee recommended Black for confirmation by a vote of 13–4 on August 16,<ref name=vanderveer>{{cite journal |last=Van Der Veer |first=Virginia |title=Hugo Black and the K.K.K. |journal=[[American Heritage (magazine)|American Heritage]] |url=https://www.americanheritage.com/hugo-black-and-kkk |date=April 1968 |volume=19 |number=3 |access-date=September 3, 2020 |archive-date=August 23, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200823183548/https://www.americanheritage.com/hugo-black-and-kkk |url-status=live }}</ref> and the full Senate took up the nomination the next day. Rumors of Black's involvement in the Ku Klux Klan surfaced, and two Democratic senators tried defeating the nomination; no conclusive evidence was presented tying Black to the klan. After rejecting 15–66 a motion to recommit the nomination to the Judiciary Committee for further review, the Senate voted 63–16 to confirm on August 17, 1937;<ref name=RL33225/> ten Republicans and six Democrats voted against.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|95}} He was [[Oath of office#Federal judiciary oaths|sworn into office]] on August 19, 1937.<ref name=SCOTUSjustices/> Shortly after, Black's KKK membership became known and there was widespread outrage; nonetheless Black went on to become a prominent champion of civil liberties and civil rights.<ref>{{cite journal |first=William E. |last=Leuchtenburg |title=A Klansman Joins the Court: The Appointment of Hugo L. Black |journal=University of Chicago Law Review |volume=41 |number=1 |date=Fall 1973 |pages=1–31 |doi=10.2307/1599085 |jstor=1599085 |s2cid=158225420 |url=https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol41/iss1/2 |access-date=September 3, 2020 |archive-date=September 24, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200924052047/https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol41/iss1/2/ |url-status=live |url-access=subscription }}</ref>
During his early years on the Supreme Court, Black helped reverse several earlier court decisions taking a narrow interpretation of federal power. Many New Deal laws that would have been struck down under earlier precedents were thus upheld. In 1939 Black was joined on the Supreme Court by [[Felix Frankfurter]] and [[William O. Douglas]]. Douglas voted alongside Black in several cases, especially those involving the First Amendment, while Frankfurter soon became one of Black's ideological foes.
 
Alabama governor [[Bibb Graves]] appointed his own wife, [[Dixie Bibb Graves|Dixie B. Graves]], to fill Black's vacated Senate seat. On Black's first day on the bench, three lawyers contested Black's appointment on the basis of the [[Ineligibility Clause]]. The court dismissed this concern in the same year in ''[[Ex parte Levitt]]''.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Hamm |first1=Andrew |title=A look back at Justice Hugo Black's first day on the bench |url=http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/10/a-look-back-at-justice-hugo-blacks-first-day-on-the-bench/ |work=[[SCOTUSblog]] |date=October 9, 2018 |access-date=October 14, 2018 |archive-date=October 14, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181014231504/http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/10/a-look-back-at-justice-hugo-blacks-first-day-on-the-bench/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
[[Image:Justicethumbc.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Black was involved in a bitter controversy with Justice Robert H. Jackson (shown above).]]
 
==Supreme Court career==
In the mid-1940s, Justice Black became involved in a bitter dispute with Justice [[Robert H. Jackson]] as a result of ''[[Jewell Ridge Coal Corp. v. Local 6167, United Mine Workers]]'' (1945). In this case the Court ruled 5–4 in favor of the UMW; Black voted with the majority, while Jackson dissented. However, the coal company requested the Court rehear the case on the grounds that Justice Black should have [[recuse]]d himself, as the mine workers were represented by Black's law partner 20 years earlier. Under the Supreme Court's rules, each Justice was entitled to determine the propriety of disqualifying himself.
As soon as Black started on the court, he advocated [[judicial restraint]] and worked to move the court away from interposing itself in social and economic matters. Black vigorously defended the "plain meaning" of the Constitution, rooted in the ideas of its era, and emphasized the supremacy of the legislature; for Black, the role of the Supreme Court was limited and constitutionally prescribed.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|16, 50}}
 
During his early years on the Supreme Court, Black helped reverse several earlier court decisions that were based on a narrow interpretation of federal power. Many [[New Deal]] laws that would have been struck down under earlier precedents were thus upheld. In 1939 Black was joined on the Supreme Court by [[Felix Frankfurter]] and [[William O. Douglas]]. Douglas voted alongside Black in several cases, especially those involving the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]], while Frankfurter soon became one of Black's ideological foes.<ref>G. Edward White, ''The Constitution and the New Deal'' (2002)</ref> From 1945 until 1971, Black was the senior associate justice of the Supreme Court.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Wood |first=Sandra L. |year=1997 |title=In the Shadow of the Chief: The Role of the Senior Associate Justice |url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/jspcth1997&id=158&div=&collection= |journal=Journal of Supreme Court History |volume=1997 |pages=25|doi=10.1111/j.1540-5818.1997.tb00109.x |s2cid=145064343 |url-access=subscription }}</ref> As of 2025, Black is the most recent sitting Supreme Court justice to have [[List of law schools attended by United States Supreme Court justices|received his legal education]] from [[list of law schools in the United States|a public law school]].
Jackson agreed that the petition for rehearing should be denied, but refused to give "blind and unqualified approval" to Black's participation in the case. Ultimately, when the Court unanimously denied the petition for rehearing, Justice Jackson released a short statement, in which Justice Frankfurter joined. The concurrence indicated that Jackson voted to deny the petition not because he approved of Black's participation in the case, but on the "limited grounds" that each Justice was entitled to determine for himself the propriety of recusal.<ref>{{cite book|last=Rehnquist|first=William H.|year=1987|title=The Supreme Court|___location=New York|publisher=Knopf}}</ref> At first the case attracted little public comment, however, after Chief Justice [[Harlan Stone]] died in 1946, rumors that President [[Harry S Truman]] would appoint Jackson as Stone's successor led several newspapers to investigate and report the ''Jewell Ridge'' controversy. Truman ultimately chose [[Fred M. Vinson]] for the position.
 
===Relationship with other justices===
Vinson's tenure as Chief Justice coincided with the [[Second Red Scare|Red Scare]], a period of intense [[anti-communism]] in the United States. In several cases the Supreme Court considered, and upheld, the validity of anticommunist laws passed during this era. For example, in ''[[American Communications Association v. Douds]]'' (1950), the Court upheld a law that required [[trade union|labor union]] officials to forswear membership in the [[Communist Party USA|Communist Party]]. Black dissented, claiming that the law violated the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]]'s [[free speech]] clause. Similarly, in ''[[Dennis v. United States]]'', {{ussc|341|494|[[1951]]}}, the Court upheld the [[Smith Act]], which made it a crime to "advocate, abet, advise, or teach the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing the Government of the United States." The law was often used to prosecute individuals for joining the Communist Party. Black again dissented, writing:
[[File:Roberthjackson.jpg|thumb|upright=0.8|left|Black was involved in a bitter controversy with Justice Robert H. Jackson (shown above).]]
<blockquote>
 
"Public opinion being what it now is, few will protest the conviction of these Communist petitioners. There is hope, however, that, in calmer times, when present pressures, passions and fears subside, this or some later Court will restore the First Amendment liberties to the high preferred place where they belong in a free society."<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=341&invol=494 ''Dennis v. United States'', 341 U.S. 494 (1951). (Black, J., dissenting).]</ref>
In the mid-1940s, Justice Black became involved in a bitter dispute with Justice [[Robert H. Jackson]] as a result of [[Jewell Ridge Coal Corp. v. United Mine Workers of America|''Jewell Ridge Coal Corp. v. Local 6167, United Mine Workers'' (1945)]]. In this case the court ruled 5–4 in favor of the UMW; Black voted with the majority, while Jackson dissented. However, the coal company requested the court rehear the case on the grounds that Justice Black should have [[recuse]]d himself, as the mine workers were represented by Black's law partner of 20 years earlier. Under the Supreme Court's rules, each Justice was entitled to determine the propriety of disqualifying himself. Jackson agreed that the petition for rehearing should be denied, but refused to give approval to Black's participation in the case. Ultimately, when the court unanimously denied the petition for rehearing, Justice Jackson released a short statement, in which Justice Frankfurter joined. The concurrence indicated that Jackson voted to deny the petition not because he approved of Black's participation in the case, but on the "limited grounds" that each Justice was entitled to determine for himself the propriety of recusal.<ref>Roger K. Newman, ''Hugo Black'' pp. 333–334.</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Rehnquist|first=William H.|year=1987|title=The Supreme Court|___location=New York|publisher=Knopf|isbn=0-688-05714-4|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/supremecourthowi00rehn}}</ref> At first the case attracted little public comment. However, after Chief Justice [[Harlan Stone]] died in 1946, rumors that President [[Harry S. Truman]] would appoint Jackson as Stone's successor led several newspapers to investigate and report the ''Jewell Ridge'' controversy.<ref name="Conscience1">''Salt of the Earth, Conscience of the Court''. By John M. Ferren, Wiley Rutledge. p. 325. UNC Press.</ref> Black and Douglas allegedly leaked to newspapers that they would resign if Jackson were appointed Chief.<ref name="Conscience1"/> Truman ultimately chose [[Fred M. Vinson]] for the position.
 
In 1948, Justice Black approved an order solicited by [[Abe Fortas]] that barred a federal district court in Texas from further investigation of significant voter fraud and irregularities in the [[1948 United States Senate election in Texas|1948 Democratic primary election runoff for United States Senator from Texas]]. The order effectively confirmed future president [[Lyndon Johnson]]'s apparent victory over former Texas governor [[Coke Stevenson]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Caro|first=Robert A.|author-link=Robert Caro|year=1990|title=The Years of Lyndon Johnson: Means of Ascent|title-link=Means of Ascent|pages=379–384|___location=New York|publisher=Vintage Books|isbn=978-0-679-73371-3}}</ref>
 
In the 1960s, Black clashed with Fortas, who by that time had been appointed as an associate justice. In 1968, a Warren clerk called their feud "one of the most basic animosities of the Court".<ref name="abe fortas">{{cite book
| title=Abe Fortas
| author=Laura Kalman
| publisher=[[Yale University Press]]
| year=1990
| isbn=0300173695
| url=https://books.google.com/books?id=x-Fbl_xE1E0C
| access-date=October 20, 2008
| archive-date=December 26, 2011
| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111226130815/http://books.google.com/books?id=x-Fbl_xE1E0C
| url-status=live
}}</ref>
 
===1950s and beyond===
Vinson's tenure as chief justice coincided with the [[Second Red Scare]], a period of intense [[anti-communism]] in the United States. In several cases the Supreme Court considered, and upheld, the validity of anticommunist laws passed during this era. For example, in ''American Communications Association v. Douds'' (1950), the court upheld a law that required [[trade union|labor union]] officials to forswear membership in the [[Communist Party USA|Communist Party]]. Black dissented, claiming that the law violated the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]]'s free speech clause. Similarly, in ''[[Dennis v. United States]]'', {{ussc|341|494|1951}}, the court upheld the [[Smith Act]], which made it a crime to "advocate, abet, advise, or teach the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing the Government of the United States". The law was often used to prosecute individuals for joining the Communist Party. Black again dissented, writing:
 
<blockquote>Public opinion being what it now is, few will protest the conviction of these Communist petitioners. There is hope, however, that, in calmer times, when present pressures, passions and fears subside, this or some later Court will restore the First Amendment liberties to the high preferred place where they belong in a free society.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=341&invol=494|title=FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February 18, 2006|archive-date=February 6, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060206223302/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=341&invol=494|url-status=live}}</ref>
</blockquote>
Beginning in the late 1940s, Black wrote for the Court in several cases relating to the establishment clause, where it had historically insisted on the strict [[separation of church and state]]. The most notable of these was ''[[Engel v. Vitale]]'' (1962), which declared state-sanctioned [[prayer]] in [[public school]]s unconstitutional. This provoked considerable opposition, especially in the [[Southern United States|South]]. Some members of Congress even attempted to restore school prayer by [[constitutional amendment]], efforts which have continued to the present day.
 
Beginning in the late 1940s, Black wrote decisions relating to the Establishment Clause, where he insisted on the strict [[separation of church and state]]. The most notable of these was ''[[Engel v. Vitale]]'' (1962), which declared state-sanctioned prayer in public schools unconstitutional. This provoked considerable opposition, especially in conservative circles.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Engel/ |title=''Engel v. Vitale'' |publisher=Tourolaw.edu |access-date=September 6, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080905035141/http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Engel/ |archive-date=September 5, 2008 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Efforts to restore school prayer by constitutional amendment failed.<ref>{{Cite web |date=December 16, 2021 |title='Hungry for a Spiritual Revival': The School Prayer Amendment and the Rise of the New Right |url=https://cafe.com/article/hungry-for-a-spiritual-revival-the-school-prayer-amendment-and-the-rise-of-the-new-right/ |access-date=April 20, 2022 |website=CAFE |language=en-US}}</ref>
In 1953 Vinson died and was replaced by [[Earl Warren]]. Black was often regarded as a member of the liberal wing of the Court, together with Warren, Douglas, [[William Brennan]], and [[Arthur Goldberg]]. Yet while he often voted with them on the Warren Court, he occasionally took his own line on some key cases, most notably ''[[Griswold v. Connecticut]]'' (1965), which established that the Constitution protected a right to privacy. Black's most prominent ideological opponent on the Warren Court was [[John Marshall Harlan II]], who replaced Justice Jackson in 1955. Black and Harlan disagreed on several issues, including the applicability of the Bill of Rights to the states, the scope of the due process clause, and the [[OMOV|one man, one vote]] principle. (For more details, see [[#Jurisprudence|Jurisprudence]] below.)
 
In 1953 Vinson died and was replaced by [[Earl Warren]]. While all members of the court were New Deal liberals, Black was part of the most liberal wing of the court, together with Warren, Douglas, [[William J. Brennan Jr.|William Brennan]], and [[Arthur Goldberg]]. They said the court had a role beyond that of Congress.<ref>Lucas A. Powe, ''The Warren Court and American Politics'' (2000)</ref> Yet while he often voted with them on the Warren Court, he occasionally took his own line on some key cases, most notably ''[[Griswold v. Connecticut]]'' (1965), which established that the Constitution protected a [[right to privacy]]. In not finding such a right implicit in the Constitution, Black wrote in his dissent that "Many good and able men have eloquently spoken and written{{nbsp}}... about the duty of this Court to keep the Constitution in tune with the times.{{nbsp}}... For myself, I must with all deference reject that philosophy."<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|120}}
 
Black's most prominent ideological opponent on the Warren Court was [[John Marshall Harlan II]], who replaced Justice Jackson in 1955. They disagreed on several issues, including the applicability of the Bill of Rights to the states, the scope of the due process clause, and the [[One man, one vote#United States|one man, one vote]] principle.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
Black had a number of [[List of law clerks of the Supreme Court of the United States (Seat 1)|law clerks who became notable in their own right]], including Judges [[Louis F. Oberdorfer]], [[Truman McGill Hobbs]], [[Guido Calabresi]], and [[Drayton Nabers Jr.]], Professors [[John K. McNulty]], [[Stephen Schulhofer]], and [[Walter E. Dellinger III]], Mayor [[David Vann (mayor)|David Vann]], FCC Commissioner [[Nicholas Johnson]], US solicitor general [[Lawrence G. Wallace]], and trial lawyer [[Stephen Susman]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2020/07/13/when-supreme-court-clerkships-become-a-family-tradition/|title=When Supreme Court Clerkships Become a Family Tradition|first1=Tony Mauro|last1=July 13|first2=2020 at 02:56{{nbsp}}pm {{pipe}} The original version of this story was published on The National Law|last2=Journal|website=National Law Journal|access-date=July 16, 2020|archive-date=July 14, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200714184025/https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2020/07/13/when-supreme-court-clerkships-become-a-family-tradition/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://memory.loc.gov/service/mss/eadxmlmss/eadpdfmss/uploaded_pdf/ead_pdf_batch_27_December_2004/2001/ms001046.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=July 16, 2020 |archive-date=March 1, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210301142140/http://memory.loc.gov/service/mss/eadxmlmss/eadpdfmss/uploaded_pdf/ead_pdf_batch_27_December_2004/2001/ms001046.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>
 
==Jurisprudence==
[[ImageFile:Hugo Black.jpg|thumb|300pxupright=0.8|Hugo Black is often described as a "[[textualism|textualist]]" or "[[Strict constructionism|strict constructionist.]]".]]
Black's [[jurisprudence]] is among the most distinctive of any members of the Supreme Court in history and has been influential on justices as diverse as [[Earl Warren]]<ref>{{Citation |title=The Warren Court: A Retrospective |first=Bernard |last=Schwartz |page=195 |publisher=Oxford Press |___location=Oxford Oxfordshire |isbn=0-19-510439-0 |year=1996}}</ref><ref>{{Citation |title=Chief Justice: A Biography of Earl Warren |first=Ed |last=Cray |pages=316–317 |publisher=Simon and Schuster |___location=New York |isbn=0-684-80852-8 |year=1997}}</ref><ref>{{Citation |title=The Warren Court in historical and political perspective |first=Mark V. |last=Tushnet |publisher=University Press of Virginia |___location=Charlottesville |year=1993 |page=[https://archive.org/details/warrencourtinhis00tush/page/105 105] |isbn=0-8139-1459-0 |url=https://archive.org/details/warrencourtinhis00tush/page/105 }}</ref> and Antonin Scalia.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Gerhardt |first1=Michael J. |title=A Tale of Two Textualists |url=https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1900&context=facpubs |website=William and Mary Law School |access-date=May 10, 2022}}</ref>
Black's jurisprudence is among the most distinctive of any member of the Supreme Court in history and has been the subject of voluiminous academic commentary. While very few people other than Black himself have adopted Black's jurisprudential views ''tout court'', Black's philosophy of judging has been influential on justices as diverse as [[Earl Warren]] and [[Antonin Scalia]].
 
Black's jurisprudence had three essential components: history, literalism, and absolutism.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|109}}<ref>{{Citation |last=Magee |first=James |title=Mr. Justice Black: Absolutist on the Court |___location=Charlottesville |publisher=University of Virginia Press |year=1980 |isbn=0-8139-0784-5 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/mrjusticeblackab0000mage }}</ref> Black's love of history was rooted in a lifelong love of books,<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|110}} which led him to the belief that historical study was necessary for one to prevent repeating society's past mistakes.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}} Black wrote in 1968 that "power corrupts, and unrestricted power will tempt Supreme Court justices just as history tells us it has tempted other judges."<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|119}}
 
Second, Black's commitment to literalism involved using the words of the Constitution to restrict the roles of the judiciary—Black would have justices validate the supremacy of the country's legislature, unless the legislature itself was denying people their freedoms.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|109}} Black wrote: "The Constitution is not deathless; it provides for changing or repealing by the amending process, not by judges but by the people and their chosen representatives."<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|123}} Black would often lecture his colleagues, liberal or conservative, on the Supreme Court about the importance of acting within the limits of the Constitution.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}}
 
Third, Black's absolutism led him to enforce the rights of the Constitution, rather than attempting to define a meaning, scope, or extent to each right.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}} Black expressed his view on the Bill of Rights in his opinion in ''[[Adamson v. California]]'' (1947), which he saw as his "most significant opinion written":
 
<blockquote>I cannot consider the Bill of Rights to be an outworn 18th century 'strait jacket'{{nbsp}}... Its provisions may be thought outdated abstractions by some. And it is true that they were designed to meet ancient evils. But they are the same kind of human evils that have emerged from century to century wherever excessive power is sought by the few at the expense of the many. In my judgment the people of no nation can lose their liberty so long as a Bill of Rights like ours survives and its basic purposes are conscientiously interpreted, enforced, and respected{{nbsp}}... I would follow what I believe was the original intention of the Fourteenth Amendment—to extend to all the people the complete protection of the Bill of Rights. To hold that this Court can determine what, if any, provisions of the Bill of Rights will be enforced, and if so to what degree, is to frustrate the great design of a written Constitution.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|120–121}}</blockquote>
 
In a 1968 public interview, reflecting on his most important contributions, Black put his dissent from ''Adamson'' "at the top of the list, but then spoke with great eloquence from one of his earliest opinions in ''Chambers v. Florida'' (1940).<ref name="oyezblack"/>
 
===Judicial restraint===
Black intensely believed in [[judicial restraint]] and reserved the power of making laws to the legislatures, often scolding his more liberal colleagues for what he saw as judicially created legislation. Conservative justice [[John M. Harlan II]] would say of Black: "No Justice has worn his judicial robes with a keener sense of the limitations that go with them."<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|119}} Conservative Judge [[Robert Bork]] wrote, "Justice Black came to have significantly more respect for the limits of the Constitution than [[William O. Douglas|Justice Douglas]] and the other leading members of [[Warren Court|the Warren majorities]] ever showed."<ref>Bork, Robert, (1990), ''The Tempting of America'', p. 72, Simon & Schuster, New York</ref> One scholar wrote, "No Justice of the Court conscientiously and persistently endeavored, as much as Justice Black did, to establish consistent standards of objectivity for adjudicating constitutional questions."<ref>Magee, James J., (1980), ''Mr. Justice Black; Absolutism on the Supreme Court'', p. 194, Charlottesville; University Press of Virginia.</ref> Black advocated a narrow role of interpretation for justices, opposing a view of justices as social engineers or rewriters of the Constitution. Black opposed enlarging constitutional liberties beyond their literal or historic "plain" meaning, as he saw his more liberal colleagues do.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|119–120}} However, he also condemned the actions of those to his right, such as the conservative Four Horsemen of the 1920s and 1930s, who unsuccessfully attempted to overturn the New Deal's legislation.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
Black forged the 5–4 majority in the 1967 decision ''Fortson v. Morris'', which cleared the path for the [[Georgia State Legislature]] to choose the governor in the deadlocked [[1966 Georgia gubernatorial election|1966]] race between [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democrat]] [[Lester Maddox]] and [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] [[Howard Callaway]]. Whereas Black voted with the majority under strict construction to uphold the state constitutional provision, his colleagues Douglas (joined by Warren, Brennan, and Fortas) and Fortas (joined by Warren and Douglas) dissented. According to Douglas, Georgia tradition would guarantee a Maddox victory though he had trailed Callaway by some three thousand votes in the general election returns. Douglas also saw the issue as a continuation of the earlier decision ''[[Gray v. Sanders]]'', which had struck down Georgia's [[County Unit System]], a kind of [[electoral college]] formerly used to choose the governor. Black argued that the U.S. Constitution does not dictate how a state must choose its governor. "Our business is not to write laws to fit the day. Our task is to interpret the Constitution", Black explained.<ref>''[[U.S. News & World Report]]'', volume 63 (1967), p. 38</ref>
 
===Textualism and originalism===
Black was noted for his advocacy of a [[textualism|textualist]] approach to constitutional interpretation. He took a "literal" or absolutist reading of the provisions of the Bill of Rights and believed that the text of the Constitution is absolutely determinative on any question calling for judicial interpretation, leading to his reputation as a "[[textualism|textualist]]" and as a "[[strict constructionism|strict constructionist]]". While the text of the constitution was an absolute limitation on the authority of judges in constitutional matters, within the confines of the text judges had a broad and unqualified mandate to enforce constitutional provisions, regardless of current public sentiment.
Black was noted for his advocacy of a [[textualism|textualist]] approach to constitutional interpretation. He took a "literal" or absolutist reading of the provisions of the Bill of Rights<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|115–118}} and believed that the text of the Constitution is absolutely determinative on any question calling for judicial interpretation, leading to his reputation as a "[[textualism|textualist]]" and as a "[[strict constructionism|strict constructionist]]". While the text of the Constitution was an absolute limitation on the authority of judges in constitutional matters, within the confines of the text judges had a broad and unqualified mandate to enforce constitutional provisions, regardless of current public sentiment, or the feelings of the justices themselves.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}}
Thus, Black refused to join in the efforts of the justices on the court who sought to abolish capital punishment in the United States, whose efforts succeeded (temporarily) in the term immediately following Black's death. He claimed that the [[Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States|Fifth]] and [[Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States|Fourteenth Amendment]]'s reference to takings of "life", and to "capital" crimes, meant approval of the death penalty was implicit in the Bill of Rights. He also was not persuaded that a right of privacy was implicit in the [[Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Ninth]] or Fourteenth amendments, and dissented from the court's 1965 ''[[Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold]]'' decision which invalidated a conviction for the use of [[contraceptive]]s. Black said "It belittles that [Fourth] Amendment to talk about it as though it protects nothing but 'privacy'{{nbsp}}... 'privacy' is a broad, abstract, and ambiguous concept{{nbsp}}... The constitutional right of privacy is not found in the Constitution."<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|241}}
 
Justice Black rejected reliance on what he called the "mysterious and uncertain" concept of [[natural law]]. According to Black that theory was vague and arbitrary, and merely allowed judges to impose their personal views on the nation. Instead, he argued that courts should limit themselves to a strict analysis of the actual text of the Constitution. Black was, in addition, an opponent of the "[[Living Constitution]]" theory. In his dissent to ''[[Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold]]'' (1965), he wrote:
Thus, Black refused to join in the efforts of the justices on the Court who sought to abolish [[capital punishment]] in the United States, whose efforts succeeded (temporarily) in the term immediately following Black's death. He claimed that the [[Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States|Fifth]] and [[Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States|Fourteenth Amendment]]'s reference to takings of "life" meant approval of the death penalty was implicit in the Bill of Rights. He also was not persuaded that a right of privacy was implicit in the [[Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Ninth]] or Fourteenth amendments, and dissented from the Court's 1965 ''[[Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold]]'' decision which invalidated a [[conviction (law)|conviction]] for the use of [[contraceptive]]s.
 
<blockquote>I realize that many good and able men have eloquently spoken and written, sometimes in rhapsodical strains, about the duty of this Court to keep the Constitution in tune with the times. The idea is that the Constitution must be changed from time to time, and that this Court is charged with a duty to make those changes. For myself, I must, with all deference, reject that philosophy. The Constitution makers knew the need for change, and provided for it. Amendments suggested by the people's elected representatives can be submitted to the people or their selected agents for ratification. That method of change was good for our Fathers, and, being somewhat old-fashioned, I must add it is good enough for me.<ref name="GriswoldvConnecticut">{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=389&invol=347|title=FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February 18, 2006|archive-date=February 8, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060208090633/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=389&invol=347|url-status=live}}</ref>
Justice Black rejected reliance on what he called the "mysterious and uncertain" concept of [[natural law]]. According to Black that theory was vague and arbitrary, and merely allowed judges to impose their personal views on the nation. Instead, he argued that courts should limit themselves to a strict analysis of the actual text of the Constitution. Black was, in addition, an opponent of the "[[Living Constitution|living constitution]]" theory. In his dissent to ''[[Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold]]'' (1965), he wrote:
<blockquote>
I realize that many good and able men have eloquently spoken and written, sometimes in rhapsodical strains, about the duty of this Court to keep the Constitution in tune with the times. The idea is that the Constitution must be changed from time to time, and that this Court is charged with a duty to make those changes. For myself, I must, with all deference, reject that philosophy. The Constitution makers knew the need for change, and provided for it. Amendments suggested by the people's elected representatives can be submitted to the people or their selected agents for ratification. That method of change was good for our Fathers, and, being somewhat old-fashioned, I must add it is good enough for me.<ref name="GriswoldvConnecticut">[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=389&invol=347 ''Griswold v. Connecticut'', 381 U.S. 479 (1965). (Black, J., dissenting).]</ref>
</blockquote>
 
Thus, some have seen Black as an [[originalism|originalist]]. But, unlike modern originalists, Black often did not look to or ignored the "original intention" or "original meaning" of the words in the Constitution. He believed that the meaning of the words was not "frozen" by what they meant in 1789, but rather that the words were to be interpreted by their literal contemporary meaning. So Black often reached results substanitally at odds with evidence of the "original meaning" of specific provisions in the Constitution. Thus commentators have usually characterized Black as an "interpretavist," one who believes that the meaning of the Constitution can only be derived from the text itself or the "four corners" of the document, as opposed to a "noninterpretavist," who looks to concepts not contained within the document itself for guidance (i.e. natural law, notions of "fairness," or economic theory). Still, Black's rejection of vague or subjective constitutional tests and his insistence on interpreting the constitutional text itself ties him to the later originalists.
Thus, some have seen Black as an [[originalism|originalist]]. David Strauss, for example, hails him as "[t]he most influential originalist judge of the last hundred years".<ref>Strauss, "The Death of Judicial Conservatism", 4 ''Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy''. 1, 4 (2009).</ref> Black insisted that judges rely on the intent of the Framers as well as the "plain meaning" of the Constitution's words and phrases (drawing on the history of the period) when deciding a case.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Justice Hugo Black (1886–1971) – Constituting America |url=https://constitutingamerica.org/justice-hugo-black-1886-1971-guest-essayist-daniel-a-cotter/ |access-date=May 19, 2022 |website=constitutingamerica.org|date=June 20, 2017 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Yarbrough |first=Tinsley |date=1987 |title=The Constitutional Faith of Mr. Justice Black |url=https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/jops/vol15/iss1/7 |journal=Journal of Political Science |volume=15 |issue=1 |issn=0098-4612 |quote=Black railed against judges who would substitute their policy judgments for the Constitution's language and the intent of its framers{{nbsp}}... At one point or another, all jurists cite language and historical intent in defending their interpretations of constitutional provisions. But arguably no other American judge has been as consistent, committed, and sincere an apostle of interpretivism as Justice Black was}}</ref>
 
Black additionally called for [[judicial restraint]] not usually seen in court decision-making. The justices of the court would validate the supremacy of the legislature in public policy-making, unless the legislature was denying people constitutional freedoms. Black stated that the legislature "was fully clothed with the power to govern and to maintain order".<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|112}}
 
===Flexibility with textualism and originalism===
One of Black's biographers commented:
 
<blockquote>Black's support of ''[[Bolling v. Sharpe|Bolling]]'' seemingly violated his own principles: the [[Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fifth Amendment]] does not contain, nor can it be read to incorporate, the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]]'s [[equal protection clause]]. When a clerk later asked how Black could justify this, he replied: 'A wise judge chooses, among plausible constitutional philosophies, one that will generally allow him to reach results he can believe in—a judge who does not to some extent tailor his judicial philosophy to his beliefs inevitably becomes badly frustrated and angry.{{nbsp}}... A judge who does not decide some cases, from time to time, differently from the way he would wish, because the philosophy he has adopted requires it, is not a judge. But a judge who refuses ever to stray from his judicial philosophy, and be subject to criticism for doing so, no matter how important the issue involved, is a fool.'<ref name=Calabresi>[[Guido Calabresi]], "Forward: Antidiscrimination and Constitutional Accountability (What the Bork-Brennan Debate Ignores)", 105 ''Harvard Law Review''. 80, 132 [1991]).</ref><ref name=Newman>Roger K. Newman, ''Hugo Black'', p. 435</ref></blockquote>
 
Black also joined Douglas's dissent in ''[[Breithaupt v. Abram]]'' which argued that substantive due process prevented police from making an involuntary intrusion into a person's body, in this case a blood sample taken while the suspect was unconscious.<ref>{{cite web |title=Breithaupt v. Abram |url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/352/432.html |website=Findlaw |access-date=October 12, 2022}}</ref>
 
===Federalism===
LikeBlack theheld otheran Justicesexpansive appointedview byof Presidentlegislative Rooseveltpower, Blackwhether heldthat anbe expansivestate viewor federal, and would often vote against judicial review of federalstate power,laws especiallythat could be struck down under the commerceCommerce clauseClause.<ref>''Mr. Justice Black and His Critics''. By Tinsley E. Yarbrough. p. 44. Duke University Press.</ref> Previously, during the 1920s and 1930s, the Courtcourt had interpreted thisthe commerce clause narrowly, often striking down laws on the grounds that Congress had overstepped its authority.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|88–90}} After 1937, however, the Supreme Court overturned several precedents and affirmed a broader interpretation of the commerceCommerce clauseClause. Black consistently voted with the majority in these decisions; for example, he joined ''[[Mulford v. Smith]]'', {{ussc|307|38|[[1939]]}}, ''[[United States v. Darby Lumber Co.]]'', {{ussc|312|100|[[1941]]}}, ''[[Wickard v. Filburn]]'', {{ussc|317|111|[[1942]]}}, ''[[Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States]]'', {{ussc|379|241|[[1964]]}}, and ''[[Katzenbach v. McClung]]'', {{ussc|379|294|[[1964]]}}.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
In several other federalism cases, however, Black ruled against the federal government. For instance, he partially dissented from ''[[South Carolina v. Katzenbach]]'', {{ussc|383|301|[[1966]]}}, in which the Courtcourt upheld the validity of the [[Voting Rights Act|Voting Rights Act of 1965]]. In an attempt to protect the voting rights of [[African American]]sAmericans, the act required any state whosewith populationa washistory at least 5% Africanof Americandiscrimination to obtain federal approval before changing its voting laws. Black wrote that the law, :
 
<blockquote>
<blockquote>... by providing that some of the States cannot pass state laws or adopt state constitutional amendments without first being compelled to beg federal authorities to approve their policies, so distorts our constitutional structure of government as to render any distinction drawn in the Constitution between state and federal power almost meaningless.<ref>[{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=383&invol=301 |title=FindLaw''Souths CarolinaUnited v.States Katzenbach'',Supreme 383Court U.S.case 301and (1966)opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February (Black18, J.2006|archive-date=June 23, concurring and dissenting)2006|archive-url=https://web.]archive.org/web/20060623001054/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=383&invol=301|url-status=live}}</ref></blockquote>
 
</blockquote>
Similarly, in ''[[Oregon v. Mitchell]]'' (1970), he delivered the opinion of the court holding that the federal government was not entitled to set the [[voting age]] for state elections.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
In the law of [[United States federal courts|federal jurisdiction]], Black made a large contribution by authoring the majority opinion in ''[[Younger v. Harris]]''. This case, decided during Black's last year on the court, has given rise to what is now known as ''Younger'' [[abstention doctrine|abstention]]. According to this doctrine, an important principle of federalism called "comity"—that is, respect by federal courts for state courts—dictates that federal courts abstain from intervening in ongoing state proceedings, absent the most compelling circumstances. The case is also famous for its discussion of what Black calls "Our Federalism", a discussion in which Black expatiates on:
 
<blockquote>...proper respect for state functions, a recognition of the fact that the entire country is made up of a Union of separate state governments, and a continuance of the belief that the National Government will fare best if the States and their institutions are left free to perform their separate functions in their separate ways.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=401&page=37|title=United States Supreme Court case and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February 20, 2006|archive-date=March 2, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060302212720/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=401&page=37|url-status=live}}</ref></blockquote>
 
Black was an early supporter of the "one man, one vote" standard for apportionment set by ''[[Baker v. Carr]]''. He had previously dissented in support of this view in ''Baker''{{'s}} predecessor case, ''[[Colegrove v. Green]]''.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
===Civil rights===
As a senator, Black filibustered an anti-lynching bill.<ref>[[Arthur Schlesinger Jr.|Schlesinger, Arthur Jr.]], ''The Age of Roosevelt Vol. III'' 437 (Houghton Mifflin 1988). {{ISBN|0-618-34087-4}}.</ref> However, during his tenure on the bench, Black established a record more sympathetic to the civil rights movement. He joined the majority in ''[[Shelley v. Kraemer]]'' (1948), which invalidated the judicial enforcement of racially [[restrictive covenant]]s. Similarly, he was part of the unanimous ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]]'' (1954) court that struck down [[racial segregation]] in public schools. Black remained determined to desegregate the South and would call for the Supreme Court to adopt a position of "immediate desegregation" in 1969's ''[[Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education]]''.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
Black authored the court's majority opinion in ''[[Korematsu v. United States]]'', which validated Roosevelt's decision to initiate the [[internment of Japanese Americans]] on the [[West Coast of the United States|West Coast]] during [[World War II]]. The decision is an example of Black's belief in the limited role of the judiciary; he validated the legislative and executive actions that led to internment, saying "it is unnecessary for us to appraise the possible reasons which might have prompted the order to be used in the form it was".<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|113}}
In the law of [[United States federal courts|federal jurisdiction]], Black made a large contribution by authoring the majority opinion in ''[[Younger v. Harris]]''. This case, decided during Black's last year on the Court, has given rise to what is now known as ''Younger'' [[abstention doctrine|abstention]]. According to this doctrine, an important principle of federalism called "comity"&mdash;that is, respect by federal courts for state courts&mdash;dictates that federal courts abstain from intervening in ongoing state proceedings, absent the most compelling circumstances. The case is also famous for its discussion of what Black calls "Our Federalism," a discussion in which Black expatiates on
<blockquote>proper respect for state functions, a recognition of the fact that the entire country is made up of a Union of separate state governments, and a continuance of the belief that the National Government will fare best if the States and their institutions are left free to perform their separate functions in their separate ways.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=401&page=37 ''Younger v. Harris'', 401 U.S. 37 (1971).]</ref></blockquote>
 
Black also tended to favor law and order over civil rights activism.<ref>Schwartz, Bernard, ''Super Chief'' (1983) p. 630</ref><ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|115}} This led him to read the Civil Rights Act narrowly. For example, he dissented in multiple cases reversing convictions of sit-in protesters, arguing to limit the scope of the Civil Rights Act.<ref>''Hamm v. Rock Hill'', 379 U.S. 306, 318 (1964) (Black, J., dissenting). See also ''Bell v. Maryland'', 378 U.S. 226, 318 (1964) (Black, J., dissenting); ''Adderley v. Fla''., 385 U.S. 39 (1966) (Black, J.); ''[[Brown v. Louisiana]]''.</ref> In 1968 he said, "Unfortunately there are some who think that Negroes should have special privileges under the law."<ref>Newman, ''Hugo Black'' p. 550.</ref> Black felt that actions like protesting, singing, or marching for "good causes" one day could lead to supporting evil causes later on; his sister-in-law explained that Black was "mortally afraid" of protesters. Black opposed the actions of some civil rights and Vietnam War protesters and believed that legislatures first, and courts second, should be responsible for alleviating social wrongs. Black once said he was "vigorously opposed to efforts to extend the First Amendment's freedom of speech beyond speech", to conduct.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}}
===Civil Rights===
During his tenure on the bench, Black established a record sympathetic to the civil rights movement. He joined the majority in ''[[Shelley v. Kramer]]'' (1948), which invalidated the judicial enforcement of racially [[restrictive covenant]]s. Similarly, he was part of the unanimous ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]]'' (1954) Court that struck down [[racial segregation]] in public schools. He was burnt in effigy by segregationists back in Alabama.
However, he also wrote the court's majority opinion in ''[[Korematsu v. United States]]'', which validated Roosevelt's decision to [[Japanese American internment|intern Japanese Americans]] on the [[West Coast of the United States|West Coast]] during [[World War II]], a decision roundly criticized today. He stated that, while race-based internment was "constitutionally suspect", it was permissible during "circumstances of direst emergency and peril." In dissent Justice [[Frank Murphy]] accused the government of "fall[ing] into the ugly abyss of racism."
 
===First Amendment===
Black took an absolutist approach to First Amendment jurisprudence, believing the first words of the Amendment that said "Congress shall make no law{{nbsp}}..." Black rejected the creation of judicial tests for free speech standards, such as the tests for "[[clear and present danger]]", "[[bad tendency (legal)|bad tendency]]", "gravity of the evil", "reasonableness", or "balancing". Black would write that the First Amendment is "wholly 'beyond the reach' of federal power to abridge{{nbsp}}... I do not believe that any federal agencies, including Congress and the court, have power or authority to subordinate speech and press to what they think are 'more important interests.{{'"}}<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}}
Black took an absolutist approach to First Amendment jurisprudence, as reflected by his famous aphorism, "No law means no law." As a result, he often found himself in dissent, although he was usually joined by Justice William O. Douglas. However, his interpretation of the establishment clause was (for the most part) shared by his colleagues, especially during the tenure of Chief Justice Warren.
 
Black took a dim view of government entanglement with religion. He believed that the First Amendment erected a "metaphorical [[Separation of church and state in the United States|wall of separation]]" between church and state. During his career Black wrote several important opinions relating to church-state separation. He delivered the opinion of the court in ''[[Everson v. Board of Education]]'' (1947), which held that the establishment clause was applicable not only to the federal government, but also to the states.{{Citation His majority opinion in ''[[McCollum v. Board of Education]]'' (1948) held that the government could not provide religious instruction in public schools. In ''[[Torcaso v. Watkins]]'' (1961), he delivered an opinion which affirmed that the states could not use religious tests as qualifications for public office. Similarly, he authored the majority opinion in ''[[Engel v. Vitale]]'' (1962), which declared it unconstitutional for states to require the recitation of official prayers in public schools.needed|date=September 2019}}
 
In four bar applicant appeals to the Supreme Court, Black advanced the argument that a person's political affiliation or beliefs, without action, was not enough to establish evidence of bad moral character. Black argued in ''Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners'' (1957) that New Mexico could not bar Schware from becoming a lawyer because he might have, at one time, consorted with Communist causes. Schware was, in fact, a decorated veteran who fought in World War II. Black reaffirmed this position in ''Konigsberg v. State Bar of California'' (1957), where a majority of the court sided with Black. However, in both ''Konigsberg v. State Bar of California II'' (1961), and ''In re Anastaplo'' (1961), the majority of justices, over Black's vigorous dissent, determined that a person who refused to answer whether they had been a member of an organization on the attorney general's Subversive Organizations List could be denied admission to the bar on the basis of bad character.<ref>Joshua E. Kastenberg, Hugo Black's Vision of the Lawyer, the First Amendment, and the Duty of the Judiciary: The Bar Applicant Cases in a National Security State, 20 William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, 661 (2012)</ref> Black wrote, in his ''Anastaplo'' dissent:
Justice Black is often regarded as a leading defender of First Amendment rights such as the freedom of speech and of the press. He refused to accept the doctrine that the freedom of speech could be curtailed on national security grounds. Thus, in ''[[New York Times Co. v. United States]]'' (1971), he voted to allow newspapers to publish the [[Pentagon Papers]] despite the [[Richard Nixon|Nixon Administration]]'s contention that publication would have security implications. In his concurring opinion, Black stated,
 
{{blockquote|Anastaplo has not indicated, even remotely, a belief that this country is an oppressive one in which the 'right of revolution' should be exercised. Quite the contrary, the entire course of his life, as disclosed by the record, has been one of devotion and service to his country—first, in his willingness to defend its security at the risk of his own life in time of war and, later, in his willingness to defend its freedoms at the risk of his professional career in time of peace.<ref>{{cite journal| title =In re George Anastaplo, Petitioner| journal =Open Jurist| date =December 14, 1960| volume =US| issue =366| page =82| url =http://openjurist.org/366/us/82/in-re-george-anastaplo| publisher=United States Supreme Court| access-date =June 25, 2013| archive-date =October 21, 2013| archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20131021092559/http://openjurist.org/366/us/82/in-re-george-anastaplo| url-status =live}}</ref>}}
:"The word 'security' is a broad, vague generality whose contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment."<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=403&invol=713 ''New York Times Co. v. United States'', 403 U.S. 713 (1971). (Black, J., concurring).]</ref>
 
Black's majority opinion in ''[[McCollum v. Board of Education]]'' (1948) held that the government could not provide religious instruction in public schools. In ''[[Torcaso v. Watkins]]'' (1961), he delivered an opinion which affirmed that the states could not use religious tests as qualifications for public office. Similarly, he authored the majority opinion in ''[[Engel v. Vitale]]'' (1962), which declared it unconstitutional for states to require the recitation of official prayers in public schools.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
He rejected the idea that the government was entitled to punish "obscene" speech. Likewise, he argued that [[slander and libel|defamation]] laws abridged the freedom of speech and were therefore unconstitutional. Most members of the Supreme Court rejected both of these views. However, Black's interpretation did attract the support of Justice Douglas.
 
Justice Black is often regarded as a leading defender of First Amendment rights such as the freedom of speech and of the press.<ref>Loren P. Beth, "Mr. Justice Black and the First Amendment: Comments on the Dilemma of Constitutional Interpretation", ''Journal of Politics'', November 1979, Vol. 41 Iss. 4, pp. 1105–1124</ref> He refused to accept the doctrine that the freedom of speech could be curtailed on national security grounds. Thus, in ''[[New York Times Co. v. United States]]'' (1971), he voted to allow newspapers to publish the [[Pentagon Papers]] despite the [[Richard Nixon|Nixon Administration]]'s contention that publication would have security implications. In his concurring opinion, Black stated:
However, he did not believe that individuals had the right to speak wherever they pleased. He delivered the majority opinion in ''[[Adderley v. Florida]]'' (1966), controversially upholding a trespassing conviction for protestors who demonstrated on government property. He also dissented from ''[[Tinker v. Des Moines]]'' (1969), in which the Supreme Court ruled that students had the right to wear armbands (as a form of protest) in schools, writing,
<blockquote>
While I have always believed that under the First and Fourteenth Amendments neither the State nor the Federal Government has any authority to regulate or censor the content of speech, I have never believed that any person has a right to give speeches or engage in demonstrations where he pleases and when he pleases.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=393&invol=503 ''Tinker v. Des Moines'', 393 U.S. 503 (1969). (Black, J., dissenting).]</ref>
</blockquote>
 
{{blockquote|In the First Amendment the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government's power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.{{nbsp}}... The word 'security' is a broad, vague generality whose contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment.|''New York Times Co. v. United States'', 403 U.S. 713, 717 (1971).<ref name="supremecourt1971">[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=403&invol=713 ''New York Times Co. v. United States'', 403 U.S. 713, 714 (1971). (Black, J., concurring)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110710155545/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=403&invol=713 |date=July 10, 2011 }}.</ref>}}
Moreover, Black took a narrow view of what constituted "speech" under the First Amendment. For example, he did not believe that [[Flag desecration|flag burning]] was speech; in ''[[Street v. New York]]'' (1969), he wrote: "It passes my belief that anything in the Federal Constitution bars a State from making the deliberate burning of the American flag an offense."<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=394&invol=576 ''Street v. New York'', 394 U.S. 576 (1969). (Black, J., dissenting).]</ref> Similarly, he dissented from ''[[Cohen v. California]]'' (1971), in which the Court held that wearing a jacket emblazoned with the words "Fuck the Draft" was speech protected by the First Amendment. He agreed that this activity "was mainly conduct, and little speech."
 
He rejected the idea that the government was entitled to punish "obscene" speech. Likewise, he argued that [[slander and libel|defamation]] laws abridged the freedom of speech and were therefore unconstitutional. Most members of the Supreme Court rejected both of these views; Black's interpretation did attract the support of Justice Douglas.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}}
 
However, he did not believe that individuals had the right to speak wherever they pleased. He delivered the majority opinion in ''[[Adderley v. Florida]]'' (1966), controversially upholding a trespassing conviction for protesters who demonstrated on government property. He also dissented from ''[[Tinker v. Des Moines]]'' (1969), in which the Supreme Court ruled that students had the right to wear armbands (as a form of protest) in schools, writing:
 
<blockquote>While I have always believed that under the First and Fourteenth Amendments neither the State nor the Federal Government has any authority to regulate or censor the content of speech, I have never believed that any person has a right to give speeches or engage in demonstrations where he pleases and when he pleases.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=393&invol=503|title=FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February 18, 2006|archive-date=September 16, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110916135214/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=393&invol=503|url-status=live}}</ref>
</blockquote>
 
Moreover, Black took a narrow view of what constituted "speech" under the First Amendment; for him, "conduct" did not deserve the same protections that "speech" did.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|114–115}} For example, he did not believe that [[Flag desecration|flag burning]] was speech; in ''[[Street v. New York]]'' (1969), he wrote: "It passes my belief that anything in the Federal Constitution bars a State from making the deliberate burning of the American flag an offense."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=394&invol=576|title=FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February 18, 2006|archive-date=March 23, 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070323165454/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=394&invol=576|url-status=live}}</ref> Similarly, he dissented from ''[[Cohen v. California]]'' (1971), in which the court held that wearing a jacket emblazoned with the words "Fuck the Draft" was speech protected by the First Amendment. He joined Justice [[Harry Blackmun]]'s dissent, which asserted that this activity "was mainly conduct, and little speech".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971) |url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/403/15/ |access-date=2024-05-10 |website=Justia Law |language=en}}</ref>
 
As a justice, Black held the view that the court should literally enforce constitutional guarantees, especially the First Amendment free speech clause. He was often labeled an 'activist' because of his willingness to review legislation that arguably violated constitutional provisions. Black maintained that literalism was necessary to cabin judicial power, which informed his dissent in ''Anastaplo''.<ref name="oyezblack">[https://www.oyez.org/justices/hugo_l_black Hugo L. Black, Official Supreme Court media at] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170901025649/https://www.oyez.org/justices/hugo_l_black |date=September 1, 2017 }} [[Oyez.org]].</ref>
 
===Criminal procedure===
Black adopted a narrower interpretation of the [[Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourth Amendment]] than many of his colleagues on the Warren Court. He dissented from ''[[Katz v. United States]]'' (1967), in which the Courtcourt held that warrantless [[Telephone tapping|wiretapping]] violated the Fourth Amendment's guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure. However, heHe argued that the Fourth Amendment only protected tangible items from physical searches or seizures. Thus, he concluded that telephone conversations were not within the scope of the amendment, and that warrantless wiretapping was consequently permissible.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Landynski |first=Jacob W. |date=1976–1977 |title=In Search of Justice Black's Fourth Amendment |url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/flr45&id=479&div=&collection= |journal=Fordham Law Review |volume=45 |page=453}}</ref>
 
Justice Black originally believed that the Constitution did not require the exclusion of illegally seized evidence at trials. In his concurrence to ''[[Wolf v. Colorado]]'' (1949), he claimed that the [[exclusionary rule]] was "not a command of the Fourth Amendment but {{nbsp}}... a judicially created rule of evidence.".<ref>[{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=338&invol=25 |title=FindLaw''Wolfs v.United Colorado'',States 338Supreme U.S.Court 25case (1949)and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February (Black18, J.2006|archive-date=January 2, concurring)2005|archive-url=https://web.]archive.org/web/20050102180412/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=338&invol=25|url-status=live}}</ref> But he later changed his mind and joined the majority in ''[[Mapp v. Ohio]]'' (1961), which applied it to state as well as federal criminal investigations. In his concurrence, he indicated that his support was based on the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of the right against self-incrimination, not on the Fourth Amendment's guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures. He wrote, "I am still not persuaded that the Fourth Amendment, standing alone, would be enough to bar the introduction into evidence {{nbsp}}... seized {{nbsp}}... in violation of its commands."<ref>[{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=367&invol=643 |title=FindLaw''Mapps v.United Ohio'',States 367Supreme U.S.Court 643case (1961)and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February (Black18, J.2006|archive-date=July 17, concurring)2014|archive-url=https://web.]archive.org/web/20140717110224/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=367&invol=643|url-status=live}}</ref>
 
In other instances, Black took a fairly broad view of the rights of criminal defendants. He joined the Supreme Court's landmark decision in ''[[Miranda v. Arizona]]'' (1966), which required law enforcement officers to [[Miranda warning|warn suspects of their rights]] prior to interrogations, and consistently voted to apply the guarantees of the Fourth, Fifth, [[Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Sixth]], and [[Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Eighth]] Amendments at the state level.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
Black was the author of the landmark casedecision in ''[[Gideon v. Wainwright]]'' (1963), which ruled that the states must provide an [[attorney]] to an [[indigent]] criminal [[defendant]] who cannot afford one. Before ''Gideon'', the Courtcourt had held that such a requirement applied only to the federal government.<ref>{{ussc|316|455|1942|name=Betts v. Brady}}</ref>
 
===Bill of Rights applicable to states, or "incorporation" question===
===Incorporation===
One of the most notable aspects of Justice Black's jurisprudence was the view that the entirety of the federal Bill of Rights was applicable to the states. Originally, the Bill of Rights was binding only upon the federal government, as the Supreme Court ruled in ''[[Barron v. Baltimore]]'' (1833). According to Black, the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, "incorporated" the Bill of Rights, or made it binding upon the states as well. In particular, he pointed to the [[Privileges or Immunities Clause]], "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." He proposed that the term "privileges or immunities" encompassed the rights mentioned in the first eight amendments to the Constitution.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|212–213}}
 
Black first expounded this theory of incorporation when the Supreme Court ruled in ''[[Adamson v. California]]'' (1947) that the [[Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fifth Amendment]]'s [[right to silence|guarantee against self-incrimination]] did not apply to the states. It was during this period of time that Hugo Black became a disciple of [[John Lilburne]] and his claim of 'freeborn rights'.<ref name=Lilburne>[[John Lilburne]]. ''The Pedigree of America's Constitution: An Alternative Explanation''. Gilder, Eric and Hagger, Mervyn. British and American Studies (University of the West, Timișoara) 14 (2008): 217–226.{{cite web|url=http://www.johnlilburne.com/reference/hugolblack.html |title=John Lilburne Research Institute - Reference - Hugo L. Black and John Lilburne |access-date=August 24, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100828111629/http://www.johnlilburne.com/reference/hugolblack.html |archive-date=August 28, 2010 }} Retrieved June 24, 2010</ref> In an appendix to his dissenting opinion, Justice Black analyzed statements made by those who framed the Fourteenth Amendment, reaching the conclusion that "the Fourteenth Amendment, and particularly its privileges and immunities clause, was a plain application of the Bill of Rights to the states."<ref>[{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=332&invol=46 |title=FindLaw''Adamsons v.United California'',States 332Supreme U.S.Court 46case (1947)and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February (Black19, J.2006|archive-date=August 9, dissenting]2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110809182337/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=332&invol=46|url-status=live}}</ref>
 
ThisBlack's theory sparked an extended debate within the Court and the academic legal community. It attracted the support of Justices such as Frank Murphy and William O. Douglas. However, it never achieved the support of a majority of the Courtcourt.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}} The most prominent opponents of Black's theory were Justices [[Felix Frankfurter]] and [[John Marshall Harlan II]].<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{page needed|date=December 2020}} Frankfurter and Harlan argued that the Fourteenth Amendment did not incorporate the Bill of Rights ''[[wikt:per se|per se]]'', but merely protected rights that are "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,", which was the standard [[Justice Cardozo]] had established earlier in ''[[Palko v. Connecticut]]''.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
The Supreme Court never accepted the argument that the Fourteenth Amendment incorporated the entirety of the Bill of Rights.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/incorp.htm |title=The Fourteenth Amendment and the Incorporation Debate |publisher=Law.umkc.edu |access-date=September 6, 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081019181827/http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/incorp.htm |archive-date=October 19, 2008 }}</ref> However, it did agree that some "fundamental" guarantees were made applicable to the states. For the most part, during the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, only [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] rights (such as free exercise of religion and freedom of speech) were deemed sufficiently fundamental by the Supreme Court to be incorporated.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
However, during the 1960s, the Courtcourt under Chief Justice Warren took the process much further, making almost all guarantees of the Bill of Rights binding upon the states.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/lpbr/subpages/reviews/belknap605.htm |title=The Supreme Court Under Earl Warren, 1953–1969 |publisher=Bsos.umd.edu |access-date=September 6, 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090812060843/http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/lpbr/subpages/reviews/belknap605.htm |archive-date=August 12, 2009 }}</ref> Thus, although the Courtcourt failed to accept Black's theory of total incorporation, the end result of its jurisprudence is very close to what Black advocated. Today, the only parts of the first eight amendments that have not been extended to the states are the [[SecondThird Amendment to the United States Constitution|SecondThird]], and [[ThirdSeventh Amendment to the United States Constitution|ThirdSeventh]] andAmendments, the [[Seventhgrand jury]] clause of the [[Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution|SeventhFifth Amendment]], amendmentsthe and[[Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Eighth Amendment]]'s protection against [[grandexcessive jurybail]], clauseand the guarantee of the [[FifthSixth Amendment to the United States Constitution|FifthSixth Amendment]], as interpreted, that criminal juries be composed of 12 members.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/Teach/freeResources/LandmarkSupremeCourtCases/ |title=BRI |publisher=Billofrightsinstitute.org |access-date=September 6, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080803015232/http://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/Teach/freeResources/LandmarkSupremeCourtCases/ <!--Added by H3llBot--> |archive-date=August 3, 2008}}</ref>
 
===Due process clause===
Justice Black was well- known for his rejection of the doctrine of [[substantive due process]]. Most Supreme Court Justices accepted the view that the due process clause encompassed not only procedural guarantees, but also "fundamental fairness" and fundamental rights. Thus, it was argued that due process included a "proceduralsubstantive" component asin welladdition asto aits "substantiveprocedural" component."{{citation needed|date=August 2022}}
 
Black, however, believed that this interpretation of the due process clause was unjustifiably broad. In his dissent to ''[[Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold]]'', he charged that the doctrine of substantive due process "takes away from Congress and States the power to make laws based on their own judgment of fairness and wisdom, and transfers that power to this Court for ultimate determination.".<ref name="GriswoldvConnecticut"/> Instead, Black advocated a much narrower interpretation of the clause. In his dissent to ''[[In re Winship]]'', he analyzed the history of the term "due process of law", and concluded: "For me, the only correct meaning of that phrase is that our Government must proceed according to the 'law of the land'&mdash;that—that is, according to written constitutional and statutory provisions as interpreted by court decisions."<ref name="caselaw.lp.findlaw.com">[{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=397&invol=358 |title=FindLaw''Ins ReUnited Winship'',States 397Supreme U.S.Court 358case (1970)and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February (Black18, J.2006|archive-date=June 17, dissenting)2006|archive-url=https://web.]archive.org/web/20060617004534/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=397&invol=358|url-status=live}}</ref>
 
Black's view on due process drew from his reading of British history; to him, due process meant all persons were to be tried in accordance with the Bill of Rights' procedural guarantees and in accordance with constitutionally pursuant laws. Black advocated equal treatment by the government for all persons, regardless of wealth, age, or race. Black's view of due process was restrictive in the sense that it was premised on equal ''procedures''; it did not extend to ''substantive'' due process. This was in accordance with Black's literalist views.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|116–117}} Black did not tie procedural due process exclusively to the Bill of Rights, but he did tie it exclusively to the Bill of Rights combined with other explicit provisions of the Constitution.<ref>{{cite book |last=Wiecek |first=William |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eaAivaq6zVAC&pg=PA517 |title=The birth of the modern Constitution: the United States Supreme Court, 1941–1953 |page=517 |year=2006 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0521848206 |access-date=February 19, 2016 |archive-date=January 14, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140114052728/http://books.google.com/books?id=eaAivaq6zVAC&pg=PA517 |url-status=live }}</ref>
None of Black's colleagues shared this interpretation of the due process clause. Harlan in particular was highly critical of it, indicating his "continued bafflement at my Brother Black's insistence that due process ... does not embody a concept of fundamental fairness" in his ''Winship'' concurrence.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=397&invol=358 ''In Re Winship'', 397 U.S. 358 (1970). (Harlan, J., concurring).]</ref> Since Black's death the Court has continued to apply the doctrine of substantive due process (most notably in ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'', which proclaimed that abortion was a constitutionally protected right), and on the present Court, only Justices [[Antonin Scalia]] and [[Clarence Thomas]] are on record as explicitly and categorically rejecting it, as did Black.
 
None of Black's colleagues shared his interpretation of the due process clause. His chief rival on the issue (and on many other issues) was [[Felix Frankfurter]], who advocated a substantive view of due process based on "natural law"—if a challenged action did not "shock the conscience" of the jurist, or violate British concepts of fairness, Frankfurter would find no violation of due process of law. [[John M. Harlan II]] largely agreed with Frankfurter, and was highly critical of Black's view, indicating his "continued bafflement at{{nbsp}}... Black's insistence that due process{{nbsp}}... does not embody a concept of fundamental fairness" in his ''Winship'' concurrence.<ref name="caselaw.lp.findlaw.com"/>
 
===Voting rights===
{{quote box
Black was one of the Supreme Court's foremost defenders of the "[[OMOV|one man, one vote]]" principle. He delivered the opinion of the court in ''[[Wesberry v. Sanders]]'' (1964), holding that the Constitution required congressional districts in any state to be approximately equal in population. He concluded that the Constitution's command "that Representatives be chosen 'by the People of the several States' means that as nearly as is practicable one man's vote in a congressional election is to be worth as much as another's."<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=volpage&court=us&vol=376&page=20 ''Wesberry v. Sanders'', 376 U.S. 1 (1964).]</ref> Likewise, he voted in favor of ''[[Reynolds v. Sims]]'' (1964), which extended the same requirement to state legislative districts on the basis of the equal protection clause.
| quote = No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined. [[United States Constitution|Our Constitution]] leaves no room for classification of people in a way that unnecessarily abridges this right.| source =
--[[Supreme Court Justice|Justice]] Black – on [[Suffrage|the right to vote]] as the foundation of democracy in ''[[Wesberry v. Sanders]]'' (1964).<ref>{{cite web |title=''Wesberry v. Sanders'', 376 U.S. 1 (1964), at 17–18. |url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/376/1/ |publisher=Justia US Supreme Court Center |access-date=January 5, 2021 |date=February 17, 1964 |archive-date=January 7, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210107043412/https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/376/1/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
| width = 27%
| align = right
| style = padding:8px;
}}
 
Black was one of the Supreme Court's foremost defenders of the "[[one man, one vote]]" principle.<ref>''Hugo Black''. By Roger K. Newman. Fordham University Press. p. 575.</ref> He delivered the opinion of the court in ''[[Wesberry v. Sanders]]'' (1964), holding that the Constitution required congressional districts in any state to be approximately equal in population. He concluded that the Constitution's command "that Representatives be chosen 'by the People of the several States' means that as nearly as is practicable one man's vote in a congressional election is to be worth as much as another's".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=volpage&court=us&vol=376&page=20|title=FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February 18, 2006|archive-date=May 2, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060502233419/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=volpage&court=us&vol=376&page=20|url-status=live}}</ref> Likewise, he voted in favor of ''[[Reynolds v. Sims]]'' (1964), which extended the same requirement to state legislative districts on the basis of the equal protection clause.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
At the same time, Black did not believe that the equal protection clause made [[Poll tax (United States)|poll taxes]] unconstitutional. During his first term on the court, he participated in a unanimous decision to uphold Georgia's poll tax in the case of ''[[Breedlove v. Suttles]]''.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/302/277/case.html|title=''Breedlove v. Suttles'', 302 U.S. 277 (1937)|access-date=August 27, 2017|archive-date=August 28, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170828013130/https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/302/277/case.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Then, twenty-nine years later, he dissented from the court's ruling in ''[[Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections]]'' (1966), invalidating the use of the poll tax as a qualification to vote, in which ''Breedlove'' was overturned. He criticized the court for exceeding its "limited power to interpret the original meaning of the Equal Protection Clause" and for "giving that clause a new meaning which it believes represents a better governmental policy".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=383&invol=663|title=FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions |website=Findlaw|access-date=February 18, 2006|archive-date=January 17, 2005|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050117131218/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=383&invol=663|url-status=live}}</ref> He also dissented from ''[[Kramer v. Union Free School District No. 15]]'' (1969), in which a majority struck down a statute that prohibited registered voters from participating in certain school district elections unless they owned or rented real property in their local school district, or were parents or guardians of children attending the public schools in the district.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/621/case.html|title=''Kramer v. Union Free Sch. Dist.'' No. 15, 395 U.S. 621 (1969)|access-date=August 27, 2017|archive-date=August 28, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170828011027/https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/621/case.html|url-status=live}}</ref>
 
===Equal Protection Clause===
By the late 1940s, Black believed that the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause was a constitutional prohibition against any state governmental actions that discriminated on the basis of race in an invidious or capricious manner. Throughout the remainder of his time on the court, Black saw only race and the characteristics of alienage as the "suspect" categories that were addressed and protected by equal protection, along with the one-man, one-vote principle, all of which merited strict scrutiny.<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|118}} In 1948, he participated in two court decisions that struck down certain California laws that were discriminatory towards aliens: ''[[Takahashi v. Fish & Game Commission]]''<ref>{{cite web| url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/334/410/| title=''Takahashi v. Fish & Game Commission'' 334 U.S. 410 (1948)| access-date=October 15, 2021| archive-date=October 27, 2021| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211027183415/https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/334/410/| url-status=live}}</ref> (he wrote the majority opinion) and ''[[Oyama v. California]]''<ref>{{cite web|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/332/633/|title=''Oyama v. California'' 332 U.S. 633|access-date=October 15, 2021|archive-date=October 27, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211027183411/https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/332/633/|url-status=live}}</ref> (he wrote a concurring opinion). During his last full term on the court, he participated in a unanimous decision, ''[[Graham v. Richardson]]'', striking down statutes that restricted welfare benefits to legal aliens but not to U.S. citizens. The majority opinion stated, "[C]lassifications based on alienage, like those based on nationality or race, are inherently suspect and subject to close judicial scrutiny. Aliens as a class are a prime example of a 'discrete and insular minority' for whom such heightened judicial solicitude is appropriate."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/403/365/|title=''Graham v. Richardson'' 403 U.S. 365 (1971)|access-date=August 7, 2020|archive-date=July 28, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728053359/https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/403/365/|url-status=live}}</ref>
 
Consistent with his view that the equal protection clause had a limited meaning, Black did not believe illegitimate children were a [[suspect class]], and he applied only [[rational basis review]] to laws that were discriminatory toward such children. In 1968, he joined a dissenting opinion written by Justice [[John Marshall Harlan II|Harlan]] in the case of ''[[Levy v. Louisiana]]'', in which a majority of the court overturned a decision made by the Louisiana courts to enforce a statute that was discriminatory toward "unacknowledged" illegitimate children.<ref>{{ussc|name=Levy v. Louisiana|volume=391|page=68|pin=|year=1968}}</ref><ref>{{ussc|name=Glona v. American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Co.|volume=391|page=77|pin=|year=1968}}</ref> Three years later, he wrote a majority opinion for the case of ''Labine v. Vincent''.<ref name=Labine>{{ussc|name=Labine v. Vincent|volume=401|page=532|pin=|year=1971}}</ref> He reasoned that for a state to treat illegitimate children worse than legitimate children is scarcely any different from treating "concubines" worse than wives, or treating other relatives of a person worse than any other relatives. "It may be possible that some of these choices are more 'rational' than the choices inherent in Louisiana's categories of illegitimates. But the power to make rules to establish, protect, and strengthen family life{{nbsp}}... is committed by the Constitution of the United States and the people of Louisiana to the legislature of that State. Absent a specific constitutional guarantee, it is for that legislature, not the life-tenured judges of this Court, to select from among possible laws."<ref name=Labine />
 
Black apparently did not think of homosexuals as a suspect class either, voting with five other colleagues on the court to uphold the authority of the federal government to deport a gay man just because he was gay, in ''[[Boutilier v. Immigration and Naturalization Service]]''.<ref>{{ussc|name=Boutilier v. Immigrantion and Naturalization Service|volume=387|page=118|pin=|year=1967}}</ref>
At the same time, Black did not believe that the equal protection clause made [[poll tax]]es unconstitutional. Thus, he dissented from the Court's ruling in ''[[Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections]]'' (1966) invalidating the use of the poll tax as a qualification to vote. He criticized the Court for exceeding its "limited power to interpret the original meaning of the Equal Protection Clause" and for "giving that clause a new meaning which it believes represents a better governmental policy."<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=383&invol=663 ''Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections'', 383 U.S. 663 (1966). (Black, J., dissenting).]</ref>
 
==Retirement and death==
[[File:Hugo L Black Courthouse.jpg|thumb|[[Hugo L. Black United States Courthouse]] in Birmingham, Alabama]]
Justice Black admitted himself to the [[National Naval Medical Center]] in [[Bethesda, Maryland]], on [[August 28]], [[1971]], and subsequently retired from the Court on [[September 17]]. He suffered a stroke two days later and died on [[September 25]]. He was buried at the [[Arlington National Cemetery]]. Black had served on the Supreme Court for thirty-four years, making him the fourth longest-serving Justice in Supreme Court history.
Justice Black admitted himself to the [[National Naval Medical Center]] in [[Bethesda, Maryland]], in August 1971, and subsequently retired from the court on September 17.<ref>Black had signed an undated letter of resignation on August 26, the day before his August 27 admission to Bethesda. The letter was delivered to President Nixon by Black's messenger on September 17; {{cite book|author1=Bob Woodward|author2=Scott Armstrong|title=The Brethren: inside the Supreme Court|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=q1IEu9zWWTIC|year=1981|publisher=Avon Books|isbn=978-0-380-52183-8|pages=183–184|access-date=February 19, 2016|archive-date=March 23, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170323150538/https://books.google.com/books?id=q1IEu9zWWTIC|url-status=live}}</ref> He had a stroke two days later and died on September 25.<ref name="The New York Times 1971">{{cite web | title=Hugo Black Suffers Stroke; Condition Listed as Serious | website=The New York Times | date=September 23, 1971 | url=https://www.nytimes.com/1971/09/23/archives/hugo-black-suffers-stroke-condition-listed-as-serious.html | access-date=October 2, 2020 | archive-date=May 3, 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210503234050/https://www.nytimes.com/1971/09/23/archives/hugo-black-suffers-stroke-condition-listed-as-serious.html | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=1971-09-25 |title=Justice Black Dies at 85; Served on Court 34 Years |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1971/09/25/archives/justice-black-dies-at-85-served-on-court-34-years-civil-liberties-a.html |access-date=2024-01-29 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>
 
Services were held at the [[Washington National Cathedral|National Cathedral]], and more than 1,000 people attended. Pursuant to Justice Black's wishes, the coffin was "simple and cheap" and was displayed at the service to show that the costs of burial are not reflective of the worth of the human whose remains were present.<ref>[http://www.funerals.org/frequently-asked-questions/51-qsimple-and-cheapq-my-father-said Pesaresi, Josephine Black ''"Simple and Cheap" My Father Said'', Monday, 26 November 2007] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100402065141/http://www.funerals.org/frequently-asked-questions/51-qsimple-and-cheapq-my-father-said |date= April 2, 2010 }} [[Funeral Consumers Alliance]].</ref> His remains were interred at the [[Arlington National Cemetery]].<ref name="Christensen">Christensen, George A. (1983), {{cite web|url=http://www.supremecourthistory.org/04_library/subs_volumes/04_c20_e.html |title=Here Lies the Supreme Court: Gravesites of the Justices |access-date=November 24, 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050903032026/http://www.supremecourthistory.org/04_library/subs_volumes/04_c20_e.html |archive-date=September 3, 2005 }}, Yearbook, [[Supreme Court Historical Society]].</ref><ref>{{Citation |last=Christensen |first=George A. |title=Here Lies the Supreme Court: Revisited |journal=Journal of Supreme Court History |volume=33 |issue=1 |pages=17–41 |year=2008 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-5818.2008.00177.x|s2cid=145227968 }}</ref>
President [[Richard Nixon]] first considered nominating [[Hershel Friday]] to fill the vacant seat, but changed his mind after the [[American Bar Association]] found Friday unqualified. Nixon then nominated [[Lewis Franklin Powell, Jr.|Lewis Powell]], who was confirmed by the Senate.
 
President [[Richard Nixon]] nominated [[Lewis F. Powell Jr.|Lewis Powell]] to succeed Black on the Supreme Court. Powell was sworn in on January 7, 1972.<ref>{{cite news| title=Retired Justice Lewis Powell Dies at 90| last1=Biskupic| first1=Joan|author-link1=Joan Biskupic|last2=Barbash| first2=Fred| newspaper=The Washington Post| date=August 26, 1998| url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/supcourt/stories/powell082698.htm| access-date=April 3, 2022}}</ref>
In 1986 Black appeared on a [[postage stamp]] issued by the [[United States Postal Service]]. He is one of only three Associate Justices to do so; the other two are [[Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.]] and [[Thurgood Marshall]].<ref>[http://www.usps.com/news/2002/philatelic/sr02_053.htm United States Postal Service. ''Philatelic News.'']</ref> In 1987, Congress passed a law designating the new courthouse building for the [[U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama]] in [[Birmingham, Alabama|Birmingham]], as the "Hugo L. Black United States Courthouse."
 
==Ku Klux Klan and anti-Catholicism==
An extensive collection of Black's personal, senatorial, and judicial papers is archived at the Manuscript Division of the [[Library of Congress]], where it is open for research.
Shortly after Black's appointment to the Supreme Court, [[Ray Sprigle]] of the ''[[Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]]'' wrote a series of articles, starting on September 13, 1937, for which he won a [[Pulitzer Prize]], revealing Black's involvement in the Klan<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|96}}<ref name="pgdigs.tumblr.com">{{Cite web|url=http://pgdigs.tumblr.com/image/30869087306|title=The Digs|website=Pittsburgh Post-Gazette |access-date=November 8, 2016|archive-date=March 17, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180317171914/http://pgdigs.tumblr.com/image/30869087306|url-status=live}}</ref> and describing his resignation from the Klan as "the first move of his campaign for the Democratic nomination for United States Senator from Alabama". Sprigle wrote that "Black and the leaders of the Klan decided it was good political strategy for Black to make the senatorial race unimpeded by Klan membership but backed by the power of the Klan. That resignation [was] filed for the duration of the campaign but never revealed to the rank and file of the order and held secretly in the records of the Alabama Realm".<ref name="pgdigs.tumblr.com"/>
 
Roosevelt denied knowledge of Black's KKK membership.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/_resources/images/pc/pc0054.pdf|title=FDR Press Conference #398|date=September 14, 1937|access-date=November 8, 2016|via=FDR Presidential Library & Museum|archive-date=February 14, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170214010126/http://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/_resources/images/pc/pc0054.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Daniels2015">{{cite book|author=Roger Daniels|title=Franklin D. Roosevelt: Road to the New Deal, 1882–1939|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KJWJCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT381|date=2015|publisher=University of Illinois Press|isbn=978-0-252-09762-1|page=381|access-date=August 29, 2018|archive-date=February 18, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200218141116/https://books.google.com/books?id=KJWJCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT381|url-status=live}}</ref>
Justice Black is honored in an exhibit in the Bounds Law Library at the [[University of Alabama School of Law]].
 
In a radio statement on October 1, 1937,<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675051613_Hugo-Black_addresses-nation_membership-of-Ku-Klux-Klan_people-gather|title=Justice Hugo Black admits his membership in Ku Klux Klan in an address to the nation through radio in Washington D.C.|website=criticalpast.com|access-date=November 8, 2016|format=video|archive-date=November 9, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161109152132/http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675051613_Hugo-Black_addresses-nation_membership-of-Ku-Klux-Klan_people-gather|url-status=live}}</ref> Black said in part, "I number among my friends many members of the colored race. Certainly, they are entitled to the full measure of protection accorded by our Constitution and our laws{{nbsp}}..."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/about/pop_transcript3.html|title=The Supreme Court . Transcript {{!}} PBS|publisher=PBS|access-date=November 8, 2016|archive-date=September 1, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170901024303/http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/about/pop_transcript3.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Black also said, "I did join the Klan. I later resigned. I never rejoined.{{nbsp}}... Before becoming a Senator I dropped the Klan. I have had nothing to do with it since that time. I abandoned it. I completely discontinued any association with the organization. I have never resumed it and never expect to do so."<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|98}} The ''Pittsburgh Post-Gazette'' reported that about fifty million listeners heard Black's address on the radio, reportedly a larger radio audience than any previous speech except the abdication address of [[King Edward VIII]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Berman |first=Daniel M. |date=1959 |title=Hugo L. Black: The Early Years |url=https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3011&context=lawreview |journal=Catholic University Law Review |volume=8 |issue=2}}</ref>
==Quotes by Black==
*"The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government's power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government." From [[New York Times Co. v. United States]].<ref>Quoted in the book by [[Floyd Abrams]], ''Speaking Freely'' (2005), Page 66.</ref>
 
Near the end of his life, Black said that joining the Klan was a mistake: "I would have joined any group if it helped get me votes."<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|16, 50}}
==Quotes about Black==
 
*"Rarely cited by the Supreme Court today, Justice Black is generally viewed by the Court (as he was by [[Alexander Bickel|Bickel]]) as too "absolutist," too unyielding, too unresponsive to other societal needs. But the [[Pentagon Papers]] case may, even now, best be recalled in Justice Black's opinion, the last he would write on the Court." [[Floyd Abrams]].<ref>Quoted in the book by [[Floyd Abrams]], ''Speaking Freely'' (2005), Page 66.</ref>
Biographers in the 1990s examined Black's views of religious denominations. Ball found regarding the Klan that Black "sympathized with the group's economic, nativist, and anti-Catholic beliefs".<ref name="Ball (2006)" />{{rp|16}} Newman said Black "disliked the Catholic Church as an institution" and gave numerous anti-Catholic speeches in his 1926 election campaign to Ku Klux Klan meetings across Alabama.<ref>Roger K. Newman, ''Hugo Black: A Biography'' (1997) pp. 87, 104</ref> However, in 1937 ''[[The Harvard Crimson]]'' reported on Black's appointment of a Jewish law clerk, noting that he "earlier had appointed Miss Annie Butt, a Catholic, as a secretary, and the Supreme Court had designated Leon Smallwood, a Negro and a Catholic as his messenger."<ref>See [http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1937/10/5/harvard-jew-appointed-by-hugo-black/ "Harvard Jew Appointed by Hugo Black To Be Law Clerk"], {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130914053118/http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1937/10/5/harvard-jew-appointed-by-hugo-black/ |date=September 14, 2013 }} ''The Harvard Crimson'' (October 5, 1937). Retrieved March 22, 2014.</ref> In the 1940s,<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=e4YUCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA225 Thomas Jefferson and the Wall of Separation Between Church and State]</ref> Black became intrigued by the anti-Catholic writings of [[Paul Blanshard]].<ref>[https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-law-and-religion/article/political-theology-of-justice-hugo-black/88395F8CC1BA7DBD764EB0EBB5056094 The Political Theology of Justice Hugo Black]</ref><ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=DAADFxHzXZsC&pg=PT374 No Establishment of Religion – America's Original Contribution to Religious Liberty]</ref> Historian J. Mills Thornton emphasizes his close ties to the KKK. The top leader of the Alabama Klan ran his campaign for the Senate, when Black visited most of the KKK locals in Alabama.<ref>J. Mills Thornton, III. (1985) "Hugo Black and the Golden Age" ''Alabama Law Review,'' 36(3), 899-914.</ref>
 
===Thurgood Marshall and ''Brown v. Board of Education''===
Black was one of the nine justices of the [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] who in 1954 ruled unanimously in ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]]'' that [[Racial segregation in the United States|segregation]] in [[State school|public schools]] is [[unconstitutional]]. The plaintiffs were represented by [[Thurgood Marshall]]. A decade later, on October 2, 1967, Marshall became the first African American to be appointed to the Supreme Court, and served with Black on the court until Black's retirement on September 17, 1971.
 
===''United States v. Price''===
In ''[[United States v. Price]]'' (1965), eighteen [[Ku Klux Klan]] members were charged with murder and conspiracy for the [[Murders of Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner|deaths]] of [[James Chaney]], [[Andrew Goodman (activist)|Andrew Goodman]] and [[Michael Schwerner]], but the charges were dismissed by the trial court. A unanimous Supreme Court, which included Black, reversed the dismissal and ordered the case to proceed to trial. Seven of these men, including fellow Klansmen [[Samuel Bowers]], [[Cecil Price]] and [[Alton Wayne Roberts]] were found guilty of the crime; eight of them, including [[Lawrence A. Rainey]], were found not guilty; and three of them, including [[Edgar Ray Killen]], had their cases end in a [[hung jury]].<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-edgar-ray-killen-20180112-story.html|title=Edgar Ray Killen, the KKK leader convicted in the 'Mississippi Burning' killings, dies in prison|date=January 12, 2018|work=[[Los Angeles Times]]}}</ref>
 
==Legacy==
Hugo Black was twice the subject of covers of ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'' magazine: On August 26, 1935, as a United States senator;<ref>{{cite magazine |url=http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19350826,00.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100830125847/http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19350826,00.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=August 30, 2010 |title=Hugo La Fayette Black |magazine=[[Time (magazine)|Time]] |at=Cover |date=August 26, 1935 |access-date=August 27, 2011}}</ref> and on October 9, 1964, as an associate justice (art by [[Robert Vickrey]]).<ref>{{cite magazine |url=http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19641009,00.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070713041122/http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19641009,00.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 13, 2007 |title=Justice Black |magazine=Time |at=Cover |date=October 9, 1964 |access-date=August 27, 2011}}</ref>
{{external media| float = right| video1 = [https://www.c-span.org/video/?75485-1/justice-black-tribute Profile of Hugo Black on the 25th anniversary of his death, September 28, 1996], [[C-SPAN]]}}
In 1986, Black appeared on the 5¢ postage stamp in the [[Great Americans series]] issued by the [[United States Postal Service]]. Along with [[Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.]] he was one of only two Associate Justices to do so until the later inclusions of [[Thurgood Marshall]], [[Joseph Story]], [[Louis Brandeis]], [[Felix Frankfurter]], and [[William J. Brennan Jr.]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/2009/pr09_080.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110224054516/http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/2009/pr09_080.htm|title=Supreme Court Justices Honored on Stamp Souvenir Sheet|archive-date=February 24, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.usps.com/news/2002/philatelic/sr02_053.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100207171148/http://www.usps.com/news/2002/philatelic/sr02_053.htm|title=United States Postal Service |website=Philatelic News |archive-date=February 7, 2010}}</ref>
 
In 1987, Congress passed a law sponsored by Alabama representative [[Ben Erdreich]], designating the new courthouse building for the [[U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama]] in [[Birmingham, Alabama|Birmingham]], as the "Hugo L. Black United States Courthouse".<ref>[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d100:h.r.00614: H.R. 614] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160408134250/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d100:h.r.00614: |date=April 8, 2016 }}</ref>
 
An extensive collection of Black's personal, senatorial, and judicial papers is archived at the Manuscript Division of the [[Library of Congress]], where it is open for research.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.loc.gov/rr/mss/text/blackh.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080503010412/http://www.loc.gov/rr/mss/text/blackh.html|title=Library of Congress manuscripts catalog, Hugo Black papers.|website=[[Library of Congress]]|archive-date=May 3, 2008}}</ref>
 
Justice Black is honored in an exhibit in the Bounds Law Library at the [[University of Alabama School of Law]]. A special Hugo Black collection is maintained by the library.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.library.law.ua.edu/spcoll/colls.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080723165650/http://www.library.law.ua.edu/spcoll/colls.htm|title=Bounds Law Library, Hugo Black special collection.|archive-date=July 23, 2008}}</ref>
 
In his hometown of Ashland, a monument to Justice Hugo Black was dedicated on October 15, 2022.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.al.com/news/2022/10/hugo-black-monument-dedication-set.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230409014818/https://www.al.com/news/2022/10/hugo-black-monument-dedication-set.html|title=AL.com, Hugo Black monument dedicated|date=October 13, 2022 |archive-date=April 9, 2023}}</ref>
 
Black served on the Supreme Court for thirty-four years, making him the fifth longest-serving Justice in Supreme Court history. He was the senior (longest serving) justice on the court for an unprecedented twenty-five years, from the death of Chief Justice [[Harlan F. Stone|Stone]] on April 22, 1946, to his own retirement on September 17, 1971. As the longest-serving associate justice, he was acting chief justice on two occasions: from Stone's death until [[Fred M. Vinson|Vinson]] took office on June 24, 1946; and from Vinson's death on September 8, 1953, until [[Earl Warren|Warren]] took office on October 5, 1953. There was no [[interregnum]] between the Warren and [[Warren Burger|Burger]] courts in 1969.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}
 
==See also==
{{Portal|Biography|Politics|United States|Law}}
* [[Hugo Black House]]
* [[List of justices of the Supreme Court of the United States]]
* [[List of law clerks of the Supreme Court of the United States (Seat 1)]]
* [[List of United States Supreme Court justices by time in office]]
* [[List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Burger Court|United States Supreme Court cases during the Burger Court]]
* [[List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Hughes Court|United States Supreme Court cases during the Hughes Court]]
* [[List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Stone Court|United States Supreme Court cases during the Stone Court]]
* [[List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Vinson Court|United States Supreme Court cases during the Vinson Court]]
* [[List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Warren Court|United States Supreme Court cases during the Warren Court]]
* [[List of United States federal judges by longevity of service]]
 
==References==
'''Notes'''
<references/>
{{Reflist}}
 
'''Bibliography'''
==Additional reading==
{{Refbegin|60em}}
*Ball, Howard. (1992). ''Of Power and Right : Hugo Black, William O. Douglas, and America's Constitutional Revolution.'' New York: Oxford University Press.
*Ball, Howard. (1996). ''Hugo L. Black: Cold Steel Warrior.'' New York: Oxford University Press.
*Black, Hugo, Jr. (1975). ''My Father: A Remembrance.'' New York: Random House.
*Dunne, Gerald T. (1977). ''Hugo Black and the Judicial Revolution.'' New York: Simon Schuster.
*Frank, John Paul. (1949). ''Mr. Justice Black, the Man and His Opinions.'' New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
*Freyer, Tony Allen. (1990). ''Hugo L. Black and the Dilemma of American Liberalism.'' Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
*''Mr. Justice and Mrs. Black: The Memoirs of Hugo L. Black and Elizabeth Black.'' (1986). New York: Random House.
*Newman, Roger K. (1994). ''Hugo Black: A Biography.'' New York: Pantheon Books.
*Simon, James F. (1989). ''The Antagonists: Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, and Civil Liberties in America.'' New York: Simon Schuster.
*Suitts, Steve. (2005). ''Hugo Black of Alabama.'' Montgomery, AL: New South Books.
*Yarbrough, Tinsley E. (1989). ''Mr. Justice Black and His Critics.'' Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
 
::'''Primary sources'''
==External links==
* Black, Hugo L. (1968). ''A Constitutional Faith''. New York, Knopf.
*{{wikisource-inline|links=[[s:author:Hugo Black|Works by Hugo Black]]}}
* Black, Hugo L and Elizabeth Black. (1985). ''Mr. Justice Black and Mrs. Black: The Memoirs of Hugo L. Black and Elizabeth Black''. New York: [[Random House]]. {{ISBN|978-0-394-54432-8}}.
*[http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=B000499 "Black, Hugo Lafayette." ''Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.'']
* Black, Hugo L., ''Mr. Justice [[Frank Murphy|Murphy]]''. 48 [[Michigan Law Review]] 739 (1950).
*[http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/legal_entity/76/ Goldman, Jeremy. "Hugo L. Black." Oyez Project.]
* Black, Hugo Jr. (1975). ''My Father: A Remembrance''. New York: Random House.
*[http://www.supremecourthistory.org/02_history/subs_timeline/images_associates/064.html Supreme Court Historical Society. "Hugo L. Black."]
*[http://www.funerals.org/faq/judge.htm Pesaresi,Josephine Black. "Simple and Cheap." Preparations for her father's funeral.]
 
::'''Secondary sources'''
<!-- Succession table -->
* Abraham, Henry J., ''Justices and Presidents: A Political History of Appointments to the Supreme Court''. 3d. ed. (Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press, 1992). {{ISBN|0-19-506557-3}}.
{{start box}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Atkins |first1=Burton M. |first2=Terry |last2=Sloope |title=The 'New' Hugo Black and the Warren Court |journal=Polity |year=1986 |volume=18 |issue=4 |pages=621–637 |doi=10.2307/3234885 |jstor=3234885 |s2cid=155514353 }} Argues that in the 1960s Black moved to the right on cases involving civil liberties, civil rights, and economic liberalism.
{{succession box | before = [[Oscar W. Underwood]] | title = [[List of United States Senators from Alabama|U.S. Senator (Class 3) from Alabama]] | years = [[March 4]], [[1927]]&ndash;[[August 19]], [[1937]] | after = [[Dixie B. Graves]]}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Ball |first1=Howard |first2=Phillip |last2=Cooper |title=Fighting Justices: Hugo L. Black and William O. Douglas and Supreme Court Conflict |journal=[[American Journal of Legal History]] |year=1994 |volume=38 |issue=1 |pages=1–37 |doi=10.2307/845321 |jstor=845321 }}
{{succession box|title=[[List of Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States|Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States]]| before=[[Willis Van Devanter]]| after=[[Lewis Franklin Powell, Jr.]]| years=[[August 19]], [[1937]]&ndash;[[September 17]], [[1971]]}}
* Ball, Howard. (1992). ''Of Power and Right: Hugo Black, William O. Douglas, and America's Constitutional Revolution''. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. {{ISBN|978-0-19-504612-0}}.
{{end box}}
*{{cite book|last=Ball |first=Howard |year=1996 |title=Hugo L. Black: Cold Steel Warrior |___location=Oxford, UK| publisher=Oxford University Press| isbn=0-19-507814-4}}.
* Ball, Howard and Phillip J. Cooper. (1992) . ''Of Power and Right: Hugo Black, William O. Douglas, and America's Constitutional Revolution''. New York: Oxford University Press.
* Ball, Howard. (1975). ''The Vision and the Dream of Justice Hugo L. Black: An Examination of a Judicial Philosophy''. University, AL: University of Alabama Press.
* {{cite book | last=Beito | first=David T. | author-link = David T. Beito| year=2023 | title = The New Deal's War on the Bill of Rights: The Untold Story of FDR's Concentration Camps, Censorship, and Mass Surveillance| edition=First | pages=4–7| ___location=Oakland | publisher=Independent Institute | isbn=978-1598133561}}
* Belknap, Michael, ''The Supreme Court Under Earl Warren, 1953–1969'' (2005), 406 pp. [https://www.amazon.com/dp/1570035636 excerpt and text search]
* Berman, Daniel M. "Hugo L. Black: The Early Years". ''Catholic University Law Review'' (1959). 8 (2): 103–116 [https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3011&context=lawreview online].
* Cushman, Clare, ''The Supreme Court Justices: Illustrated Biographies,1789–1995'' (2nd ed.) (Supreme Court Historical Society), ([[Congressional Quarterly]] Books, 2001) {{ISBN|978-1-56802-126-3}}.
* Dunne, Gerald T. (1977). ''Hugo Black and the Judicial Revolution''. New York: [[Simon & Schuster]].
* [[John Paul Frank|Frank, John Paul]]. (1949). ''Mr. Justice Black, the Man and His Opinions''. New York: [[Alfred A. Knopf]].
* [[John Paul Frank|Frank, John Paul]], ''The Justices of the United States Supreme Court: Their Lives and Major Opinions'' (Leon Friedman and Fred L. Israel, editors) (Chelsea House Publishers: 1995) {{ISBN|978-0-7910-1377-9}}.
* Freyer, Tony Allen. (1990). ''Hugo L. Black and the Dilemma of American Liberalism''. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. {{ISBN|978-0-8173-1194-0}}.
* Freyer, Tony Allan, ed. (1990). ''Justice Hugo Black and Modern America''. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press. {{ISBN|0-8173-1194-7}}.
* Hall, Kermit L., ed. ''The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States''. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press, 1992. {{ISBN|0-19-505835-6}}
* Hamilton, Virginia Van der Veer. (1972). ''Hugo Black: The Alabama Years''. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.
* {{cite journal |last=Hockett |first=Jeffrey D. |title=Justices Frankfurter and Black: Social Theory and Constitutional Interpretation |journal=Political Science Quarterly |volume=107 |issue=3 |year=1992 |pages=479–499 |doi=10.2307/2152441 |jstor=2152441 }}
* Hockett, Jeffrey D. (1996). ''New Deal Justice: The Constitutional Jurisprudence of Hugo L. Black, Felix Frankfurther, and Robert H. Jackson''. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. {{ISBN|978-0-8476-8210-2}}.
* Magee, James J. (1980). ''Mr. Justice Black, Absolutist of the Court''. Charlottesville: [[University Press of Virginia]]. {{ISBN|1-58838-144-7}}.
* Mendelson, Wallace. (1961). ''Justices Black and Frankfurter: Conflict in the Court''. Chicago: [[University of Chicago Press]].
* Newman, Roger K. (1994). ''Hugo Black: A Biography''. New York: Pantheon Books. {{ISBN|978-0-8232-1786-1|0-679-43180-2}}.
* Pritchett, C. Herman, ''Civil Liberties and the Vinson Court''. (The [[University of Chicago]] Press, 1969) {{ISBN|978-0-226-68443-7}}
* Silverstein, Mark. (1984). ''Constitutional Faiths: Felix Frankfurter, Hugo Black, and the Process of Judicial Decision Making''. Ithaca: [[Cornell University Press]].
* Simon, James F. (1989). ''The Antagonists: Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, and Civil Liberties in America''. New York: Simon & Schuster.
* Strickland, Stephen Parks, ed. (1967). ''Hugo Black and the Supreme Court: A Symposium''. Indianapolis, Bobbs-Merrill.
* Suitts, Steve. (2005). ''Hugo Black of Alabama''. Montgomery, AL: New South Books. {{ISBN|1-58838-144-7}}.
* Thornton, J. Mills III. (1985) "Hugo Black and the Golden Age" ''Alabama Law Review,'' 36(3), 899–914; emphasis on his close ties to KKK in 1920s.
* Urofsky, Melvin I., ''Division and Discord: The Supreme Court under Stone and Vinson, 1941–1953'' ([[University of South Carolina Press]], 1997) {{ISBN|1-57003-120-7}}.
* Urofsky, Melvin I., ''The Supreme Court Justices: A Biographical Dictionary'' (New York: [[Garland Publishing]] 1994). 590 pp.{{nbsp}}{{ISBN|978-0-8153-1176-8}}.
* Williams, Charlotte. (1950). ''Hugo L. Black: A Study in the Judicial Process''. Baltimore, [[Johns Hopkins Press]].
* [[Bob Woodward|Woodward, Robert]] and [[Scott Armstrong (journalist)|Armstrong, Scott]]. ''[[The Brethren (non-fiction)|The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court]]'' (1979). {{ISBN|978-0-380-52183-8|978-0-671-24110-0|978-0-7432-7402-9}}.
* {{cite journal |last=Yarbrough |first=Tinsley E. |year=1971 |title=Mr. Justice Black and Legal Positivism |journal=[[Virginia Law Review]] |volume=57 |issue=3 |pages=375–407 |doi=10.2307/1072096 |jstor=1072096 }}
* Yarbrough, Tinsley E. (1989). ''Mr. Justice Black and His Critics''. Durham, NC: [[Duke University Press]].
{{Refend}}
 
==External links==
<!-- Link farms -->
{{Sister project links |wikt=no |commons=Category:Hugo Black |b=no |n=no |q=Hugo Black |s=Hugo Black |v=no |species=no |author=yes}}
{{start U.S. Supreme Court composition| CJ=[[Charles Evans Hughes|Hughes]]| }}
* {{CongBio|B000499}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1937–1938}}
* {{FJC Bio|181|nid=1377871|name=Hugo Lafayette Black<!--(1886–1971)-->}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1938}}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20110424121024/http://www.michaelariens.com/ConLaw/justices/black.htm Ariens, Michael, Hugo Black]
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1939}}
* [https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/robes_black.html Fox, John, ''Capitalism and Conflict, Biographies of the Robes, Hugo Black'']. [[Public Broadcasting Service]].
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1940–1941}}
* [https://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/legal_entity/76/ Goldman, Jeremy. "Hugo L. Black". Oyez Project.]
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1941 (Feb-July)}}
* [http://www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/face/Article.jsp?id=h-1848 Suitts, Steve, Hugo Black] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140905005852/http://www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/face/Article.jsp?id=h-1848 |date=September 5, 2014 }}, [[Encyclopedia of Alabama]].
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition CJ| CJ=[[Harlan Fiske Stone|Stone]]| }}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20060213204703/http://www.supremecourthistory.org/02_history/subs_timeline/images_associates/064.html Supreme Court Historical Society. "Hugo L. Black"].
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1941–1942}}
* [https://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=3837 Hugo Black of Alabama: How His Roots and Early Career Shaped the Great Champion of the Constitution.] [[Library of Congress]], [[John W. Kluge Center]] Video of Steve Suitts discussing his book "Hugo Black of Alabama"
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1943–1945}}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20100402065141/http://www.funerals.org/frequently-asked-questions/51-qsimple-and-cheapq-my-father-said Pesaresi, Josephine Black. "'Simple and Cheap' My Father Said" – preparations for her father's funeral.]
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1945–1946}}
* {{cite journal |last = Reich |first = Charles A. |author-link = Charles A. Reich |title = A Passion for Justice |journal = Touro Law Review |volume = 26 |pages = 393–431 |year = 2010 |url = http://www.tourolaw.edu/LawReview/uploads/pdfs/Reich.pdf }}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition CJ| CJ=[[Fred M. Vinson|Vinson]]| }}
* [https://ancexplorer.army.mil/publicwmv/#/arlington-national/search/results/1/CgVCbGFjaxIESHVnbw--/ ANC Explorer]
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1946–1949}}
* [https://vault.fbi.gov/Hugo%20Black FBI file on Hugo Black] at vault.fbi.gov
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1949–1953}}
* {{PM20|FID=pe/001838}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition CJ| CJ=[[Earl Warren|Warren]]| }}
{{s-start}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1953-1954}}
{{s-ppo}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1955-1956}}
{{s-bef|before=[[Oscar Underwood]]}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1956-1957}}
{{s-ttl|title=[[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]] nominee for [[List of United States senators from Alabama|U.S. Senator]] from [[Alabama]]<br />([[Classes of United States senators|Class 3]])|years=[[1926 United States Senate election in Alabama|1926]], [[1932 United States Senate election in Alabama|1932]]}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1957-1958}}
{{s-aft|after=[[J. Lister Hill|Lister Hill]]}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1958-1962}}
|-
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1962-1965}}
{{s-bef|before=[[William H. King]]}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1965-1967}}
{{s-ttl|title=[[United States Senate Democratic Conference Secretary|Secretary of the Senate Democratic Conference]]|years=1927–1937}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1967-1969}}
{{s-aft|after=[[Joshua B. Lee]]}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition CJ| CJ=[[Warren E. Burger|Burger]]| }}
|-
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1969}}
{{s-par|us-sen}}
{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1970-1971}}
{{s-bef|before=[[Oscar Underwood]]}}
{{end U.S. Supreme Court composition}}
{{s-ttl|title=[[List of United States senators from Alabama|U.S. Senator (Class 3) from Alabama]]|years=1927–1937|alongside=[[James Thomas Heflin|Thomas Heflin]], [[John H. Bankhead II|John Bankhead]]}}
{{s-aft|after=[[Dixie Bibb Graves|Dixie Graves]]}}
|-
{{s-new|office}}
{{s-ttl|title=Chair of the [[United States Senate Lobby Investigation Committee|Senate Lobby Investigation Committee]]|years=1935–1937}}
{{s-aft|after=[[Sherman Minton]]}}
|-
{{s-bef|before=[[David I. Walsh|David Walsh]]}}
{{s-ttl|title=Chair of the [[United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions|Senate Education Committee]]|years=1937}}
{{s-aft|after=[[Elbert D. Thomas|Elbert Thomas]]}}
|-
{{s-legal}}
{{s-bef|before=[[Willis Van Devanter]]}}
{{s-ttl|title=[[Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States]]|years=1937–1971}}
{{s-aft|after=[[Lewis F. Powell Jr.|Lewis Powell]]}}
{{s-end}}
 
{{USSenAL}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Black, Hugo LaFayette}}
{{SenHELPCommitteeChairmen}}
{{SCOTUS Justices}}
 
{{Authority control}}
{{Persondata
|NAME=Black, Hugo
|ALTERNATIVE NAMES=Black, Hugo LaFayette
|SHORT DESCRIPTION=U.S. Supreme Court justice
|DATE OF BIRTH=[[February 27]], [[1886]]
|PLACE OF BIRTH=[[Harlan, Alabama]], [[Wilcox County, Alabama]], [[United States of America]]
|DATE OF DEATH=[[September 25]], [[1971]]
|PLACE OF DEATH=[[National Naval Medical Center]], [[Bethesda, Maryland]], [[United States of America]]
}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Black, Hugo Lafayette}}
[[Category:1886 births]]
[[Category:1971 deaths]]
[[Category:UnitedPeople Statesfrom Senators fromAshland, Alabama]]
[[Category:UnitedAmerican Statespeople Supremeof CourtScotch-Irish justicesdescent]]
[[Category:Democratic Party United States senators from Alabama]]
[[Category:Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States]]
[[Category:United States federal judges appointed by Franklin D. Roosevelt]]
[[Category:Alabama state court judges]]
[[Category:Alabama lawyers]]
[[Category:Writers from Birmingham, Alabama]]
[[Category:Former Ku Klux Klan members]]
[[Category:Politicians from Birmingham, Alabama]]
[[Category:Military personnel from Birmingham, Alabama]]
[[Category:United States Army personnel of World War I]]
[[Category:United States Army officers]]
[[Category:University of Alabama School of Law alumni]]
[[Category:University of Alabama people]]
[[Category:American military personnel of World War I]]
[[Category:Oddfellows]]
[[Category:Ku Klux Klan members]]
[[Category:People from Alabama]]
[[Category:Burials at Arlington National Cemetery]]
[[Category:Members of the Odd Fellows]]
 
[[Category:American Ku Klux Klan members]]
[[he:הוגו לפאייט בלאק]]
[[Category:20th-century United States senators]]
[[uk:Блек Г'юго]]