Nixon, Moore & Haldeman on Supreme Court appointments and William H. Rehnquist

Transcript (AI-generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI (WhisperX) and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Names and numbers are often wrong; speakers are not identified. Do not cite it as authoritative — verify against the audio and the finding aid.

Download transcript (.txt) · JSON data

Hey, hey, hey.

I've got the material here.

Okay.

Remarks part of 1,125 words, but in the names of time, I thought I should bring it in.

Oh, yeah.

Well, that's the suggestion.

We'll go to the back of it first.

Give you a little picture of it.

Okay.

I'll tell you a second, Mr. President, but one of his classmates had told me that, and then I had.

We talked to him this morning, and he acknowledged that he was first.

And I was kind to her.

There isn't much wrong.

No, I felt that the people don't know what a law clerk is.

This is probably in red.

Yes, that's it.

It has the first.

You can say it has the first, but that's the problem.

What did you say?

Well, the problems we have.

What did you do?

I think rational.

I don't know whether a law firm thing should be covered more by...

I think that's the interest of the lawyers, the people, and they must say, the way I would do that is because I was having a driver's death, a driver's death.

Now, you know, people think a clerk, they don't know what that is.

Well, then I'll leave it in there.

Yes, sir.

All right.

The thing I want that to do, I want that to be already given to the press at 7.30, 7.45.

The statement, all the backup material, just to be given to the press at 7.45.

I said, I'll make a step back.

All right, all right.

Yes, sir.

I've been working alone in one bureau.

I could have had one published way.

Now, the fact of the matter, though,

I don't care about it.

I'm just, yes.

I don't see that one, unless you have something to add to it.

Well, only, just a one thing you should know, please, comes up.

Mr. Powell, how do you know there's never been a case of this being done?

I don't do that.

No, I mean, if you've got a case, you know, it's just so you don't have to have one of the three American lawyers.

Is it Rehnquist?

Rehnquist has, yes, blood and blood.

He's had one case there anyway.

Is that what I remember?

Yes.

You see, I'm not going to miss this opportunity to say, please, you guys, I'm sorry.

No, no, no, I'm not going to say it.

I just forgot that traditional philosophy is what they were known for.

Traditional philosophy.

That was great.

You saw what Javits posed himself by coming out strong.

He didn't care about any answer to philosophy.

He didn't know if he could be qualified for basketball.

He was like, that was the guy with the red list.

He was a high-nosed poet.

But they acquiesced themselves.

They set it up for a guy who had this problem.

I think we'll say it first, the title first.

Nobody would say it first.

I could say it first.

Who's going to say it?

That's right.

He was so careful about it.

Right away.

The average, in addition to what we did last year, the average in one year of appointments in the presence of the United States, that would include a lot of areas.

Commissions, boards, appointments, NAILO, you know what I mean?

Just in 3,000 reports.

Well, appointments, yeah, that's what I'm saying.

Well, I don't care, really.

In general, I just want another one.

Okay.

That is one question.

Let me just give you a feel as to how this is going to run.

During a four-year term, the President of the United States today makes an average of $50,000 in finance from various governments.

By far one of the most important points he made for those in the Supreme Court of the United States.

Prejudice come and go, but the Supreme Court introduced a decision to allow forever.

Because they will make decisions that will affect your lives and the lives of your children for generations to come, I should like to share with you tonight my reasons for electing two individuals whose names I will send to the Senate tomorrow for confirmation of justice in the Supreme Court.

I'd love to be able to start something good after the pandemic.

Over the past few months, I have received thousands of letters from all over the country, and I am extraordinarily indebted to the Congress of the United States of America.

Because one of the things is that after the retirement of Mr. Joseph Black, the former United States Senator, there has been great support for the appointment of a member of the Senate or House of the Congress.

So at that point, I knew that Congress would be added to the Senate.

A great number of letters have recommended the appointment of a woman to the Senate.

A number of others have recommended the appointment of representatives of religious, racial, and nationalities, but it's not presently upheld by the court.

I believe the Supreme Court should withdraw its sentence to be representative of the entire nation.

With only nine seats to fill, obviously every group in this country cannot be represented by a court.

These are the criteria I believe should be applied in the name of the people in the court.

This court is the highest judicial level in this country.

His members should therefore be among the very best lawyers in the nation.

The second consideration is the judicial philosophy of those we reserve.

I emphasize the word traditional because whether an individual is a Democrat or a Republican cannot and should not be a decisive factor in the way that you do about this program.

Let me further indicate what I mean by judicial philosophy.

It is the exception rather than the rule when any two lawyers agree on any post to be acquainted.

That is as it should be.

There would be a total repudiation of our constitutional system if the judges on the Supreme Court were to be like puppets on a string pulled over the President to acquaint him.

When I appointed Chief Justice Berger, I told him that when the day was to remember the Senate, he could expect that I would never talk to him about a case pending before his court.

He and all the other judges in my apartment had no obligation whatsoever to quote or clear it with the President.

In the case of both Chief Justice Berger and Justice Black, in the case of the two nominees that I shall send to the Senate tomorrow, their sole obligation is to clear it with the Constitution and their impeachment.

It is to the Constitution and to the American people, not to the President.

As far as judicial philosophy is concerned, it is my belief that it is the duty of a judge to interpret the Constitution, not to place himself above the Constitution or outside the Constitution.

He should not twist or bend the Constitution, but it can only be dispersed in political and social views.

Judges who adhere to this philosophy find that they do not always agree in their interpretation of the Constitution.

We have an excellent example of this from the two judges whose vacancies I now have the liberty to build.

Mr. Justice Black and Justice Harlan.

Mr. Justice Black was a liberal.

Mr. Justice Harlan was a conservative.

They disagreed with many cases.

And I learned not only from reading their opinions over the years, but from appearing twice before them and arguing case reports in court.

Both were great judges with a great ability to ask questions that went in the heart of the matter before them, and then to make a decision based on their interpretation of the Constitution.

Still, with the confirmation of the individuals I have selected, it will be charged if they are concerned.

This is true, but only in the judicial, not the political sense.

During my campaign, I pledged to nominate in the Supreme Court individuals who shared my traditional philosophy, which is basically a conservative philosophy.

There's one example in which Ferris was sitting in my campaign.

Many cases over the past few years have come before the Court involving the delicate balance between the rights of society and the rights of defendants accused of crimes against society.

Honest and dedicated constitutional lawyers have disagreed as to where and how to maintain that balance.

Mr. Walter Lippman wrote 21 years ago, the balance of power within our society has turned dangerous against the peace forces, against governors and mayors and legislators, against the police and the courts.

21 months ago, let's be 21 months ago.

Two of the individuals in my body for the courts believe as I do, that in those decisions, the problem is still in the balance between the righteous side and the men that's accused of crime.

The peace forces must not be denied the legal tools they need to protect innocent people from criminal forces.

But as great constitutional lawyers, they are getting the lawyers at the same time.

But the lawyer's most precious principle is that the rights of innocent men must always receive .

It's in these criteria of mine that I selected two names, the name of the son of the son of the father .

How, Mr. So-and-so, are the best qualified men, the best qualified individuals that I can find in these two appointments?

They will add distinction and excellence, and a high degree of discrepancy among them.

I am asking the Senate to approve their nomination to prompt it, and the Court will move forward on the backlog of the bill to come to a decision on the date of its approval.

Let me add a final word with regard to a subject that is very close to my heart because of my legal background, and because of my years of studying with the American System Department.

I know with great distress,

rise in tendency to grow in tendency to criticize the Supreme Court of the Constitution.

Not all of them, but American Republicans in every individual, rise to disagree with the decision.

And after those decisions are handed down, it is our obligation to obey the law, whether we like it or not.

And it is our duty as citizens to respect the institution of the Supreme Court of the United States.

We have had many debates over the years about the role of the Supreme Court, and some of those debates have even ended up in our account.

But let's never forget that in respect for the court, the final interpretation of the court is the law of the land.

It's indispensable for Americans to survive in a free society.

Whether we agree or disagree with the views of Congress at that point, let us always hold in highest respect what is the greatest judicial value of last resort in the entire world.

Except for the contribution we can make to the cause of world peace, there is probably no more important legacy the President can leave these times than his appointment to the Supreme Court of the United States.

I believe that Chief Justice Gertrude and Mr. Justice Black, by their conduct and their decisions, have earned their respect, not only of those who supported them at the time I nominated them, but also of those who either opposed them or were loyal to their opponents.

It is my firm conviction that the two men, whose names I have sent to the Senate tomorrow, who deserve the same respect as all Americans who were proud of them, and they were diligent in their behalf and their overriding responsibility, guardians of our country

the respect for the law in order to make justice .

Two or three little things.

You said Mr. Black is a liberal and just as a conservative.

I wondered if you should use the label that you talked about when you say it's considered.

Yeah, yeah.

Some, yeah.

It's distinctive.

It may not have been by most observers.

Most observers would have said yes.

Most observers would say or have said.

Just say have said.

Would say.

That's what they would say.

All right.

No, it's just a fetish we made up in the government.

The law of the land, a Supreme Court, it's the law of the case, actually.

People often use that phrase, and it's a little, it's also a part of the system.

I can't leave it out.

The interpret of the law, I think that's, the law is good enough, but the law of the land, the interpret of the law, if you've got to take the case, then it's the case that's the problem.

All right?

And then, and maybe you didn't, so, earlier you said these two,

and he doesn't make that stand.

That's my mistake, but I was wondering if you were saying full measurables and measure or something like that.

And they make that standard to an extent.

Yes, so it looks like we're not just getting someone who meets the standard.

Outstanding.

I would...

here to speak of.

I think this sort of thing is a kind of a thing

I don't have a double standard.

I respected Black.

I went to this goddamn funeral.

Why don't they have respect for some of our guys?

Huh?

That's what I said.

The liberals have a double standard.

I just think that they can treat themselves and give you a wonderful life.

They can prove to you particularly about how there ain't no Southerner out here.

He's got the left wings on him.

He has a low history of...

He was the president of the school board of chairmen.

He was a little slow, but it's up to you to decide against him.

But he said, I kind of looked up to him, and he said, well, we were brewing as fast as you did, Mr. Floyd, and so on.

Let me tell you the way I introduced Floyd.

Mr. Lewis Powell was from Virginia.

But like another great Virginia, Chief Justice Marchant, whose powers were recognized by his colleagues, and the various higher central ones, barred from being a man of reference not just Virginia, or the South, he is first and foremost a great American.

Do you have a video of him?

That's what I've always kind of been.

But now, if you go in there and look at the little material that we have here, that's what I put in there.

Is that right?

This would be an actual textbook, even elders, we are teaching that.

Yes, but I meant to say that this is not a case of remarks, but so we have to have a rhythm.

Don't we have to have a rhythm today?

No, but I do, but I want you to go back and rework those through you, and I'll ask you some questions before I open up.

to compare it to those other bachelors.

But now it's a pretty good comparison.

Well, it's almost there.

Well, there's seven guidelines here as to what you count about government.

118 years for the seven, and 53 for the two.

No, the average is 27, and the average is 17 years now, the average law practice per man.

Our two men have an average of 27.

I don't think it has to be like this.

I don't think it's public.

So I said, this is what I attest to what you've done so far.

You're taking this kind role.

You're way ahead of them.

You've done better, man, than any laser tester in terms of product application.

But it's tough to get a principle of strict discretion as to appointing the kind of man who said you would.

You know, he also has to get their opinions for the law.

And it's really a plan.

It's a plan, man.

and the solar plexus.

So, if I ever do mention, if I ever mention it at all, each one of the persons, the person's flesh, they can't pop that.

And as I said, I had a second try to check the law school, but Brent was told he was going to be first.

As a matter of fact, he said that he was told that he had the highest marks in the history of the school, but he said that's the kind of thing you can't document, and he just didn't listen to what he was saying.

I don't know.

I don't think he wrote about that in person.

I don't know.

He would keep it quiet.

I think it's better that he not know.

You see, he'd have a hell of a time not telling me the origin.

Or he'd have a hell of a time not telling me Dean.

Dean would have a hell of a time not telling me.

I just don't believe in telling anybody anything.

Don't ever believe in telling me one thing.

You could stick this under a mechanic.

Now, looking at this... You don't need anything more from me on that?

I just want to recognize this thing.

The only thing I just want to hear.

Yes.

You like the feeling.

Could I sit and read?

You know, I listen to you.

I get pretty...

I'm not the best critic when you get gone sometimes.

I get enthused.

Could I sit outside and read it or in the corner?

Well, I'm not ready yet because I don't have the...

The things I picked up were just those... a little bit technical.

No, I loved it.

I just thought that...

It's got to be something that relates to people.

It can't be too legal.

Right.

Is there a line or a phrase in there that they're going to pick out if I give you a little bit of a statement?

Oh, yeah.

They're going to pick out one sentence and then they're going to pick it out.

But substance, it's great, but it also has one little substance to it.

You're active.

Yeah, I thought it was real.

That's cool.

We take things up.

We always pick up things.

We fight.

The President's come and gone.

He's got to stay in.

He wasn't there all along.

It sets the whole country on fire.

and somebody I know, if I were to spend a great price, that's their job.

I got here by being a lot of that.

That's what I mean.

I said a few things to stir people up.

Stay that way, please.

I'm going to leave on the idea that they are conservatives.

The bait over, well, the bait over, I don't mean about that, the bait over the confirmation of his last name, it may be charged, it may be charged that they are conservatives.

This is true, but only in a judicial, not in a political sense.

That's good, that's clear, that's true.

Well, I want it.

The term is good.

We quote, we don't.

This is true, but only in a judicial, not a political sense.

Now, in a judicial sense, that's what I'm worried about.

a conservative in the sense of conservative institutions.

I thought for a minute you were talking about lots, and if I may be able to take it out and just say, just say lots.

Well, we just did this on the question, and I agree.

I think we're going to take a look at it.

Yeah, I think it's a major question.

About the roles for that.

And... We have to get back to that about the roles.

During the war...

I think that most people understand they need to put something in the slavery they don't think they can do.

Even though that, how do you say, in terms of creating a climate for war?

It's a little odd.

Nixon, Moore & Haldeman on Supreme Court appointments and William H. Rehnquist

AI Summary

Audio

Transcript (AI-generated)

NARA Description

Nixon Library Finding Aid

Also recorded on October 21, 1971

Cite this conversation