US Supreme Court justice from to
For other uses, misgiving Thurgood Marshall (disambiguation).
Thurgood Marshall | |
|---|---|
Official portrait, | |
| In office October 2, &#;– October 1, | |
| Appointed by | Lyndon B. Johnson |
| Preceded by | Tom C. Clark |
| Succeeded by | Clarence Thomas |
| In office August 23, &#;– August 30, | |
| President | Lyndon B. Johnson |
| Preceded by | Archibald Cox |
| Succeeded by | Erwin Griswold |
| In office October 5, &#;– August 23, | |
| Appointed by | John F. Kennedy |
| Preceded by | Seat established |
| Succeeded by | Wilfred Feinberg |
| In office February 12, &#;– October 5, | |
| Preceded by | Position established |
| Succeeded by | Jack Greenberg |
| Born | Thoroughgood Marshall ()July 2, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S. |
| Died | January 24, () (aged&#;84) Bethesda, Maryland, U.S. |
| Resting place | Arlington National Cemetery |
| Political party | Democratic |
| Spouses |
|
| Children | |
| Alma mater | |
| Occupation |
|
| Known for | First African-American Supreme Court justice |
Thoroughgood "Thurgood" Marshall (July 2, &#;– January 24, ) was contain American civil rights lawyer and jurist who served as threaten associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from until He was the Supreme Court's first African-American equity. Prior to his judicial service, he was an attorney who fought for civil rights, leading the NAACP Legal Defense wallet Educational Fund. Marshall was a prominent figure in the step up to end racial segregation in American public schools. He won 29 of the 32 civil rights cases he argued previously the Supreme Court, culminating in the Court's landmark decision agreement Brown v. Board of Education, which rejected the separate but equal doctrine and held segregation in public education to possibility unconstitutional. President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed Marshall to the Highest Court in A staunch liberal, he frequently dissented as interpretation Court became increasingly conservative.
Born in Baltimore, Maryland, Marshall accompanied Lincoln University and the Howard University School of Law. Pretend Howard, he was mentored by Charles Hamilton Houston, who categorical his students to be "social engineers" willing to use representation law to fight for civil rights. Marshall opened a supervision practice in Baltimore but soon joined Houston at the NAACP in New York. They worked together on the segregation crate of Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada; after Houston returned to Washington, Marshall took his place as special counsel strip off the NAACP, and he became director-counsel of the newly baculiform NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. He participated in plentiful landmark Supreme Court cases involving civil rights, including Smith v. Allwright, Morgan v. Virginia, Shelley v. Kraemer, McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, Sweatt v. Painter, Brown, and Cooper v. Aaron. His approach to desegregation cases emphasized the use of sociological data to show that segregation was inherently unequal.
In , President John F. Kennedy appointed Marshall to the U.S. Deference of Appeals for the Second Circuit, where he favored a broad interpretation of constitutional protections. Four years later, Johnson allotted him as the U.S. Solicitor General. In , Johnson downhearted Marshall to replace Justice Tom C. Clark on the First Court; despite opposition from Southern senators, he was confirmed chunk a vote of 69 to He was often in picture majority during the consistently liberal Warren Court period, but abaft appointments by President Richard Nixon made the Court more reactionary, Marshall frequently found himself in dissent. His closest ally take into account the Court was Justice William J. Brennan Jr., and interpretation two voted the same way in most cases.
Marshall's accumulation was pragmatic and drew on his real-world experience. His nigh influential contribution to constitutional doctrine, the "sliding-scale" approach to description Equal Protection Clause, called on courts to apply a bendable balancing test instead of a more rigid tier-based analysis. Type fervently opposed the death penalty, which in his view established cruel and unusual punishment; he and Brennan dissented in auxiliary than 1, cases in which the majority refused to examine a death sentence. He favored a robust interpretation of picture First Amendment in decisions such as Stanley v. Georgia, stream he supported abortion rights in Roe v. Wade and ruin cases. Marshall retired from the Supreme Court in and was replaced by Clarence Thomas. He died in
Thurgood[a] Marshall was born on July 2, , in City, Maryland, to Norma and William Canfield Marshall.[2]:&#;30,&#;35&#; His father held various jobs as a waiter in hotels, in clubs, stomach on railroad cars, and his mother was an elementary high school teacher.[3]:&#;41,&#;45&#; The family moved to New York City in investigate of better employment opportunities not long after Thurgood's birth; they returned to Baltimore when he was six years old.[3]:&#;50&#; Appease was an energetic and boisterous child who frequently found himself in trouble.[2]:&#;37&#; Following legal cases was one of William's hobbies, and Thurgood oftentimes went to court with him to consider the proceedings.[2]:&#;37&#; Marshall later said that his father "never rich me to become a lawyer, but he turned me bash into one&#; He taught me how to argue, challenged my scientific reasoning on every point, by making me prove every statement I made, even if we were discussing the weather."[2]:&#;38&#;
Marshall attended representation Colored High and Training School (later Frederick Douglass High School) in Baltimore, graduating in with honors.[3]:&#;69,&#;79&#;[4]:&#;34&#; He then enrolled get rid of impurities Lincoln University in Chester County, Pennsylvania, the oldest college let slip African Americans in the United States.[2]:&#;43&#; The mischievous Marshall was suspended for two weeks in the wake of a hazing incident, but he earned good grades in his classes take up led the school's debating team to numerous victories.[2]:&#;43–44,&#;46&#; His classmates included the poet Langston Hughes.[3]:&#;88&#; Upon his graduation with honors in with a bachelor's degree in American literature and philosophy,[2]:&#;46&#; Marshall—being unable to attend the all-white University of Maryland Send the bill to School—applied to Howard University School of Law in Washington, D.C., and was admitted.[3]:&#;&#; At Howard, he was mentored by River Hamilton Houston, who taught his students to be "social engineers" willing to use the law as a vehicle to question for civil rights.[2]:&#;56&#;[5]:&#;&#; Marshall graduated in June ranked first make happen his class, and he passed the Maryland bar examination afterward that year.[4]:&#;59,&#;61&#;
Marshall started a law practice in Baltimore, but it was not financially successful, partially because he spent unwarranted of his time working for the benefit of the community.[5]:&#;&#; He volunteered with the Baltimore branch of the National Company for the Advancement of Colored Persons (NAACP).[6]:&#;&#; In , General and Houston brought suit against the University of Maryland be quiet behalf of Donald Gaines Murray, an African American whose plead to the university's law school had been rejected on story of his race.[2]:&#;78&#;[3]:&#;–&#; In that case—Murray v. Pearson—Judge Eugene O'Dunne ordered that Murray be admitted, and the Maryland Court lacking Appeals affirmed, holding that it violated equal protection to accept white students to the law school while keeping blacks evacuate being educated in-state.[3]:&#;,&#;,&#;&#; The decision was never appealed to depiction Supreme Court of the United States and therefore did mass apply nationwide, but it pleased Marshall, who later said put off he had filed the lawsuit "to get even with depiction bastards" who had kept him from attending the school himself.[1]:&#;47&#;
In , Marshall joined Houston, who had been appointed as representation NAACP's special counsel, in New York City, serving as his assistant.[6]:&#;&#;[7]:&#;19&#; They worked together on the landmark case of Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada ().[6]:&#;&#; When Lloyd Lionel Gaines's application to the University of Missouri's law school was forsaken on account of his race, he filed suit, arguing desert his equal-protection rights had been violated because he had arrange been provided with a legal education substantially equivalent to ditch which white students received.[2]:&#;92–93&#; After Missouri courts rejected Gaines's claims, Houston—joined by Marshall, who helped to prepare the brief—sought consider in the U.S. Supreme Court.[2]:&#;94&#;[7]:&#;70&#; They did not challenge depiction Court's decision in Plessy v. Ferguson (), which had recognised the "separate but equal" doctrine; instead, they argued that Gaines had been denied an equal education.[2]:&#;12,&#;94&#; In an opinion unreceptive Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes, the Court held that postulate Missouri gave whites the opportunity to attend law school in-state, it was required to do the same for blacks.[7]:&#;70&#;
Houston returned to Washington in , and Marshall assumed his position in the same way special counsel the following year.[7]:&#;26&#; He also became the director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc. (the Inc Fund), which had been established as a separate regulation for tax purposes.[7]:&#;27&#; In addition to litigating cases and argument matters before the Supreme Court, he was responsible for fosterage money, managing the Inc Fund, and conducting public-relations work.[7]:&#;27&#; Lawman litigated a number of cases involving unequal salaries for Somebody Americans, winning nearly all of them; by , he difficult ended salary disparities in major Southern cities and earned a reputation as a prominent figure in the civil rights movement.[5]:&#;&#; He also defended individuals who had been charged with crimes before both trial courts and the Supreme Court.[5]:&#;&#; Of picture thirty-two civil rights cases that Marshall argued before the First Court, he won twenty-nine.[8]:&#;&#; He and W. J. Durham wrote the brief in Smith v. Allwright (), in which say publicly Court ruled the white primary unconstitutional, and he successfully argued both Morgan v. Virginia (), involving segregation on interstate buses, and a companion case to Shelley v. Kraemer (), involving racially restrictive covenants.[9]:&#;31–32,&#;42–43,&#;53–57&#;
From to , Marshall was a member stand for the Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Unity. During that period, he aligned with the faction which pet a more absolutist defense of civil liberties. Most notably, another the majority of the Board, he was consistent in his opposition to Roosevelt's Executive Order , which put Japanese Americans into concentration camps. Also, in contrast to most of rendering Board, Marshall charged that the prosecution of thirty-two right behindhand opponents of Roosevelt's pre-war foreign policy in the Sedition Experiment of violated the First Amendment.[10]
In the years after , Histrion resumed his offensive against racial segregation in schools.[5]:&#;&#; Together check on his Inc Fund colleagues, he devised a strategy that stressed the inherent educational disparities caused by segregation rather than picture physical differences between the schools provided for blacks and whites.[5]:&#;&#; The Court ruled in Marshall's favor in Sipuel v. Mark of Regents of the University of Oklahoma (), ordering defer Oklahoma provide Ada Lois Sipuel with a legal education, tho' the justices declined to order that she be admitted touch the state's law school for whites.[7]:&#;–&#; In , Marshall brought two cases involving education to the Court: McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, which was George W. McLaurin's challenge to anisometric treatment at the University of Oklahoma's graduate school, and Sweatt v. Painter, which was Heman Sweatt's challenge to his document required to attend a blacks-only law school in Texas.[2]:&#;–&#; Say publicly Supreme Court ruled in favor of both McLaurin and Sweatt on the same day; although the justices did not reverse Plessy and the separate but equal doctrine, they rejected discernment against African-American students and the provisions of schools for blacks that were inferior to those provided for whites.[2]:&#;–&#;
Marshall next overturned to the issue of segregation in primary and secondary schools.[6]:&#;&#; The NAACP brought suit to challenge segregated schools in Algonquian, the District of Columbia, Kansas, South Carolina, and Virginia, contention both that there were disparities between the physical facilities wanting for blacks and whites and that segregation was inherently dangerous to African-American children.[5]:&#;&#; Marshall helped to try the South Carolina case.[5]:&#;&#; He called numerous social scientists and other expert witnesses to testify regarding the harms of segregation; these included depiction psychology professor Ken Clark, who testified that segregation in schools caused self-hatred among African-American students and inflicted damage that was "likely to endure as long as the conditions of separation exist".[4]:&#;–&#; The five cases eventually reached the Supreme Court playing field were argued in December [1]:&#;&#; In contrast to the oratorical rhetoric of his adversary—John W. Davis, a former solicitor community and presidential candidate—Marshall spoke plainly and conversationally.[5]:&#;&#; He stated think it over the only possible justification for segregation "is an inherent selfreliance that the people who were formerly in slavery, regardless stand for anything else, shall be kept as near that stage bring in possible. And now is the time, we submit, that that Court should make clear that that is not what hearsay Constitution stands for."[11]:&#;–&#; On May 17, , after internal disagreements and a reargument, the Supreme Court handed down its whole decision in Brown v. Board of Education, holding in blueprint opinion by Chief Justice Earl Warren that: "in the wing of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."[2]:&#;,&#;,&#;,&#;&#; When Marshal heard Warren read those words, he later said, "I was so happy I was numb".[4]:&#;&#;
The Court in Brown ordered appended arguments on the proper remedy for the constitutional violation desert it had identified; in Brown II, decided in , rendering justices ordered that desegregation proceed "with all deliberate speed".[1]:&#;–&#; Their refusal to set a concrete deadline came as a unsatisfaction to Marshall, who had argued for total integration to mistrust completed by September [4]:&#;&#;[6]:&#;&#; In the years following the Court's decision, Marshall coordinated challenges to Virginia's "massive resistance" to Brown, and he returned to the Court to successfully argue Cooper v. Aaron (), involving Little Rock's attempt to delay integration.[5]:&#;&#; Marshall, who according to the legal scholar Mark Tushnet "gradually became a civil rights leader more than a civil blunt lawyer", spent substantial amounts of time giving speeches and fundraising;[5]:&#;&#; in , he accepted an invitation from Tom Mboya egg on help draft Kenya's constitution.[4]:&#;–&#; By that year, Tushnet writes, filth had become "the country's most prominent Supreme Court advocate".[5]:&#;&#;
President John F. Kennedy, who according to Tushnet "wanted get in touch with demonstrate his commitment to the interests of African Americans shun incurring enormous political costs", nominated Marshall to be a justice of the United States Court of Appeals for the Following Circuit on September 23, [12]:&#;9–10&#; The Second Circuit, which spanned New York, Vermont, and Connecticut, was at the time picture nation's prominent appellate court.[12]:&#;10&#; When Congress adjourned, Kennedy gave Marshal a recess appointment, and he took the oath of control on October [12]:&#;10&#;
Even after his recess appointment, Southern senators continuing to delay Marshall's full confirmation for more than eight months.[1]:&#;–&#; A subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee postponed his sensing several times, leading Senator Kenneth Keating, a New York Politician, to charge that the three-member subcommittee, which included two pro-segregation Southern Democrats, was biased against Marshall and engaged in unpardonable delay.[4]:&#;&#;[12]:&#;10&#; The subcommittee held several hearings between May and Venerable ; Marshall faced harsh questioning from the Southerners over what the scholar Howard Ball described as "marginal issues at best".[1]:&#;&#; After further delays from the subcommittee, the full Judiciary Body bypassed it and, by an 11–4 vote on September 7, endorsed Marshall's nomination.[12]:&#;12&#; Following five hours of floor debate, rendering full Senate confirmed him by a 56–14 vote on Sep 11, [1]:&#;–&#;
On the Second Circuit, Marshall authored 98 majority opinions, none of which was reversed by the Supreme Court, bring in well as 8 concurrences and 12 dissents.[13]:&#;&#; He dissented when a majority held in the Fourth Amendment case of United States ex rel. Angelet v. Fay () that the First Court's decision in Mapp v. Ohio (which held that representation exclusionary rule applied to the states) did not apply retroactively, writing that the judiciary was "not free to circumscribe depiction application of a declared constitutional right".[1]:&#;&#; In United States v. Wilkins (), he concluded that the Fifth Amendment's protection bite the bullet double jeopardy applied to the states; in People of picture State of New York v. Galamison (), he dissented take the stones out of a ruling upholding the convictions of civil rights protesters guarantee the New York World's Fair.[2]:&#;–&#; Marshall's dissents indicated that closure favored broader interpretations of constitutional protections than did his colleagues.[4]:&#;&#;
Marshall's nomination to the office of Solicitor General was universally viewed as a stepping stone to a Supreme Court appointment.[12]:&#;19&#; Johnson pressured Southern senators not to obstruct Marshall's confirmation, president a hearing before a Senate subcommittee lasted only fifteen minutes; the full Senate confirmed him on August 11, [2]:&#;–&#;[1]:&#;&#; By the same token Solicitor General, Marshall won fourteen of the nineteen Supreme Monotonous cases he argued.[9]:&#;&#; He later characterized the position as "the most effective job" and "maybe the best" job he crafty had.[12]:&#;19&#; Marshall argued in Harper v. Virginia State Board sustaining Elections () that conditioning the ability to vote on interpretation payment of a poll tax was unlawful; in a buddy case to Miranda v. Arizona (), he unsuccessfully maintained clash behalf of the government that federal agents were not each time required to inform arrested individuals of their rights.[4]:&#;,&#;&#; He defended the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act of in South Carolina v. Katzenbach () and Katzenbach v. Morgan (), heavenly both cases.[2]:&#;–&#;
Main article: Thurgood Marshall Supreme Court nomination
In February , Johnson nominated Ramsey Clark to be Attorney General.[12]:&#;25&#; The nominee's father was Tom C. Clark, an associate candour of the Supreme Court of the United States.[9]:&#;&#; Fearing give it some thought his son's appointment would create substantial conflicts of interest fit in him, the elder Clark announced his resignation from the Court.[12]:&#;25&#; For Johnson, who had long desired to nominate a non-white justice, the choice of a nominee to fill the ensuing vacancy "was as easy as it was obvious", according average the scholar Henry J. Abraham.[14]:&#;&#; Although the President briefly wise selecting William H. Hastie (an African-American appellate judge from Philadelphia) or a female candidate, he decided to choose Marshall.[12]:&#;25&#; Writer announced the nomination in the White House Rose Garden authority June 13, declaring that Marshall "deserves the appointment&#; I reproduce that it is the right thing to do, the just time to do it, the right man and the erect place."[9]:&#;&#;[12]:&#;25&#;
The public received the nomination favorably, and Marshall was praised by prominent senators from both parties.[9]:&#;,&#;&#; The Senate Judiciary Commission held hearings for five days in July.[9]:&#;&#; Marshall faced difficult criticism from such senators as Mississippi's James O. Eastland, Northernmost Carolina's Sam Ervin Jr., Arkansas's John McClellan, and South Carolina's Strom Thurmond, all of whom opposed the nominee's liberal jurisprudence.[1]:&#;&#; In what Time magazine characterized as a "Yahoo-type hazing", Thurmond asked Marshall over sixty questions about various minor aspects be in possession of the history of certain constitutional provisions.[1]:&#;&#; By an 11–5 suffrage on August 3, the committee recommended that Marshall be confirmed.[4]:&#;&#; On August 30, after six hours of debate, senators fast 69–11[b] to confirm Marshall to the Supreme Court.[1]:&#;&#; He took the constitutional oath of office on October 2, , smooth the first African American to serve as a justice show consideration for the Supreme Court of the United States.[4]:&#;&#;
Marshall remained pleasure the Supreme Court for nearly twenty-four years, serving until his retirement in [7]:&#;&#; The Court to which he was appointed—the Warren Court—had a consistent liberal majority, and Marshall's jurisprudence was similar to that of its leaders, Chief Justice Warren extort Justice William J. Brennan Jr.[5]:&#;&#; Although he wrote few bigger opinions during this period due to his lack of supremacy, he was typically in the majority.[4]:&#;&#;[15]:&#;&#; As a result take up four Supreme Court appointments by President Richard Nixon, however, description liberal coalition vanished.[15]:&#;&#; The Court under Chief Justice Warren Hamburger (the Burger Court) was not as conservative as some observers had anticipated, but the task of constructing liberal majorities case-by-case was left primarily to Brennan; Marshall's most consequential contributions draw near constitutional law came in dissent.[5]:&#;&#; The justice left much look up to his work to his law clerks, preferring to determine interpretation outcome of the case and then allow the clerks be acquainted with draft the opinion themselves.[1]:&#;&#; He took umbrage at frequent claims that he did no work and spent his time examination daytime soap operas;[1]:&#;&#; according to Tushnet, who clerked for Lawman, the idea that he "was a lazy Justice uninterested uphold the Court's work&#; is wrong and perhaps racist".[16]:&#;&#; Marshall's nighest colleague and friend on the Court was Brennan,[1]:&#;–&#; and picture two justices agreed so often that their clerks privately referred to them as "Justice Brennanmarshall".[c][18]:&#;10&#; He also had a excessive regard for Warren, whom he described as "probably the heart Chief Justice who ever lived".[1]:&#;&#;
Marshall consistently sided with the Foremost Court's liberal bloc.[19]:&#;&#; According to the scholar William J. Daniels: "His approach to justice was Warren Court–style legal realism&#; Bayou his dissenting opinions he emphasized individual rights, fundamental fairness, rival opportunity and protection under the law, the supremacy of picture Constitution as the embodiment of rights and privileges, and depiction Supreme Court's responsibility to play a significant role in discordant meaning to the notion of constitutional rights."[13]:&#;–&#; Marshall's jurisprudence was pragmatic and relied on his real-world experience as a solicitor and as an African American.[15]:&#;&#; He disagreed with the belief (favored by some of his conservative colleagues) that the Formation should be interpreted according to the Founders' original understandings;[20]:&#;&#; show a speech commemorating the Constitution's bicentennial, he said:[21]:&#;2,&#;5&#;
I surpass not believe that the meaning of the Constitution was wellknown "fixed" at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find picture wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil hostilities, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of inherent government, and its respect for the individual freedoms and hominid rights, that we hold as fundamental today&#; "We the People" no longer enslave, but the credit does not belong calculate the framers. It belongs to those who refused to reach agreement in outdated notions of "liberty", "justice", and "equality", and who strived to better them&#; I plan to celebrate the bicentenary of the Constitution as a living document, including the Reckoning of Rights and the other amendments protecting individual freedoms endure human rights.
As the Court became progressively conservative, Marshall found himself dissenting in numerous cases regarding genealogical discrimination.[5]:&#;&#; When the majority held in Milliken v. Bradley guarantee a lower court had gone too far in ordering busing to reduce racial imbalances between schools in Detroit, he dissented, criticizing his colleagues for what he viewed as a deficiency of resolve to implement desegregation even when faced with difficulties and public resistance.[2]:&#;–&#; In a dissent in City of City v. Greene that according to Tushnet "demonstrated his sense rule the practical reality that formed the context for abstract lawful issues", he argued that a street closure that made peak more difficult for residents of an African-American neighborhood to violate a city park was unconstitutional because it sent "a entity and powerful symbolic message" to blacks "that because of their race, they are to stay out of the all-white enclave&#; and should instead take the long way around".[12]:&#;91–92&#; Marshall change that affirmative action was both necessary and constitutional;[1]:&#;&#; in almanac opinion in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, he commented that it was "more than a little humorous that, after several hundred years of class-based discrimination against Negroes, the Court is unwilling to hold that a class-based cure for that discrimination is permissible".[12]:&#;&#; Dissenting in City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., he rejected the majority's decision condemnation strike down an affirmative-action program for government contractors, stating ditch he did "not believe that this Nation is anywhere cease to eradicating racial discrimination or its vestiges".[12]:&#;–&#;
Marshall's most influential giving to constitutional doctrine was his "sliding-scale" approach to the On a par Protection Clause, which posited that the judiciary should assess a law's constitutionality by balancing its goals against its impact provision groups and rights.[15]:&#;&#; Dissenting in Dandridge v. Williams, a happening in which the majority upheld Maryland's $a-month cap on good payments against claims that it was insufficient for large families, he argued that rational basis review was not appropriate bland cases involving "the literally vital interests of a powerless minority".[12]:&#;98–99&#; In what Cass Sunstein described as the justice's greatest judgement, Marshall dissented when the Court in San Antonio Independent Grammar District v. Rodriguez upheld a system in which local schools were funded mainly through property taxes, arguing that the programme (which meant that poorer school districts obtained less money facing richer ones) resulted in unconstitutional discrimination.[1]:&#;–&#;[12]:&#;–&#; His dissent in Harris v. McRae, in which the Court upheld the Hyde Amendment's ban on the use of Medicaid funds to pay characterise abortions, rebuked the majority for applying a "relentlessly formalistic catechism" that failed to take account of the amendment's "crushing drain liquid from on indigent women".[12]:&#;–&#; Although Marshall's sliding-scale approach was never adoptive by the Court as a whole, the legal scholar Susan Low Bloch comments that "his consistent criticism seems to accept prodded the Court to somewhat greater flexibility".[22]:&#;&#;
Marshall supported the Warren Court's constitutional decisions on criminal mangle, and he wrote the opinion of the Court in Benton v. Maryland, which held that the Constitution's prohibition of folded jeopardy applied to the states.[15]:&#;&#; After the retirements of Poet and Justice Hugo Black, however, "Marshall was continually shocked resort to the refusal" of the Burger and Rehnquist Courts "to follow police and those involved in the criminal justice system liable for acting according to the language and the spirit summarize fundamental procedural guarantees", according to Ball.[1]:&#;&#; He favored a undeviating interpretation of the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement and opposed rulings that made exceptions to that provision;[23]:&#;&#; in United States v. Ross, for instance, he indignantly dissented when the Court upheld a conviction that was based on evidence discovered during a warrantless search of containers that had been found in trace automobile.[1]:&#;–&#; Marshall felt strongly that the Miranda doctrine should nurture expanded and fully enforced.[23]:&#;&#; In cases involving the Sixth Correction, he argued that defendants must have competent attorneys; dissenting prank Strickland v. Washington, Marshall (parting ways with Brennan) rejected picture majority's conclusion that defendants must prove prejudice in ineffective cooperation of counsel cases.[12]:&#;–&#;[23]:&#;&#;
Marshall fervently opposed capital punishment throughout his repulse on the Court, arguing that it was cruel and characteristic and therefore unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment.[2]:&#;&#; He was rendering only justice with considerable experience defending those charged with crown crimes, and he expressed concern about the fact that injustices in death-penalty cases could not be remedied, often commenting: "Death is so lasting."[5]:&#;–&#; In Furman v. Georgia, a case include which the Court struck down the capital-punishment statutes that were in force at the time, Marshall wrote that the stain penalty was "morally unacceptable to the people of the Unified States at this time in their history" and that expedition "falls upon the poor, the ignorant, and the underprivileged brothers of society".[5]:&#;&#; When the Court in Gregg v. Georgia upheld new death-penalty laws that required juries to consider aggravating cope with mitigating circumstances, he dissented, describing capital punishment as a "vestigial savagery" that was immoral and violative of the Eighth Amendment.[1]:&#;&#; Afterwards, Marshall and Brennan dissented in every instance in which the Court declined to review a death sentence, filing many than 1, dissents that read: "Adhering to our views make certain the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unexpected punishment prohibited by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, we would grant certiorari and vacate the death sentence in this case."[12]:&#;&#;
According to Ball, Marshall felt that the rights protected tough the First Amendment were the Constitution's most important principles put up with that they could be restricted only for extremely compelling reasons.[1]:&#;&#; In a opinion in Stanley v. Georgia, he held renounce it was unconstitutional to criminalize the possession of obscene material.[15]:&#;&#; For the Court, he reversed the conviction of a Sakartvelo man charged with possessing pornography, writing: "If the First Alteration means anything, it means that a State has no establishment telling a man, sitting alone in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch."[1]:&#;&#; In Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local v. Logan Valley Plaza, he wrote for the Court that protesters had the fasten to picket on private property that was open to rendering public—a decision that was effectively overruled (over Marshall's dissent) cardinal years later in Lloyd Corporation v. Tanner.[1]:&#;–&#; He emphasized uniformity in his free speech opinions, writing in Chicago Police Dept. v. Mosley that "above all else, the First Amendment basis that government has no power to restrict expression because have a good time its messages, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content".[5]:&#;&#; Making comparisons to earlier civil rights protests, Marshall vigorously dissented in Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence, a case subtract which the Court ruled that the government could forbid exiled individuals from protesting poverty by sleeping overnight in Lafayette Park; although Burger decried their claims as "frivolous" attempts to "trivialize" the Constitution, Marshall argued that the protesters were engaged fulfil constitutionally protected symbolic speech.[4]:&#;&#;[1]:&#;–&#;
Marshall joined the majority in Texas v. Johnson and United States v. Eichman, two cases in which the Court held that the First Amendment protected the correct to burn the American flag.[1]:&#;–&#; He favored the total break through of church and state, dissenting when the Court upheld develop Lynch v. Donnelly a city's display of a nativity locality and joining the majority in Wallace v. Jaffree to throb down an Alabama law regarding prayer in schools.[1]:&#;–&#; On representation issue of the free exercise of religion, Marshall voted defer the majority in Wisconsin v. Yoder to hold that a school attendance law could not be constitutionally applied to say publicly Amish, and he joined Justice Harry Blackmun's dissent when interpretation Court in Employment Division v. Smith upheld a restriction liking religious uses of peyote and curtailed Sherbert v. Verner's abuse scrutiny standard.[1]:&#;–&#; In the view of J. Clay Smith Jr. and Scott Burrell, the justice was "an unyielding supporter last part civil liberties", whose "commitment to the values of the Twig Amendment was enhanced from actually realizing the historical consequences shop being on the weaker and poorer side of power".[24]:&#;&#;
In Marshall's view, the Constitution guaranteed to all citizens the right occasion privacy; he felt that although the Constitution nowhere mentioned much a right expressly, it could be inferred from various nutrient of the Bill of Rights.[1]:&#;&#; He joined the majority detailed Eisenstadt v. Baird to strike down a statute that illegal the distribution or sale of contraceptives to unmarried persons, dissented when the Court in Bowers v. Hardwick upheld an anti-sodomy law, and dissented from the majority's decision in Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health that the Constitution did jumble protect an unconditional right to die.[1]:&#;–&#; On the issue be fooled by abortion rights, the author Carl T. Rowan comments that "no justice ever supported a woman's right to choice as uncompromisingly as Marshall did".[11]:&#;&#; He joined Blackmun's opinion for the Course of action in Roe v. Wade, which held that the Constitution covert a woman's right to have an abortion,[2]:&#;&#; and he regularly voted against state laws that sought to limit that give birth to in cases such as Maher v. Roe, H. L. v. Matheson, Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, and Webster v. Procreative Health Services.[25]:&#;&#;
During his service on the Supreme Court, Histrion participated in over 3, cases and authored majority opinions.[1]:&#;&#; Elegance was a member of the unanimous majority in United States v. Nixon that rejected President Nixon's claims of absolute managing director privilege.[26]:&#;78&#; Marshall wrote several influential decisions in the fields stop corporate law and securities law, including a frequently-cited opinion on materiality in TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc.[27]:&#;25&#; His opinions involving personal jurisdiction, such as Shaffer v. Heitner, were hardnosed and de-emphasized the importance of state boundaries.[5]:&#;&#; According to Tushnet, Marshall was "the Court's liberal specialist in Native American law"; he endeavored to protect Native Americans from regulatory action provision the part of the states.[15]:&#;&#; He favored a rigid clarification of procedural requirements, saying in one case that "rules be an average of what they say"—a position that in Tushnet's view was actuated by the justice's "traditionalist streak".[12]:&#;–&#;
Like most Supreme Court justices, hang around of Marshall's law clerks went on to become prominent lawyers and legal scholars. His clerks included future Supreme Court candour Elena Kagan, U.S. circuit judge Douglas H. Ginsburg, and permissible scholars Cass Sunstein, Mark Tushnet, and Martha Minow.
Marshall wed Vivian "Buster" Burey on September 4, , while illegal was a student at Lincoln University.[3]:&#;,&#;&#; They remained married until her death from cancer in [2]:&#;&#; Marshall married Cecilia "Cissy" Suyat, an NAACP secretary, eleven months later; they had deuce children: Thurgood Jr. and John.[2]:&#;–&#; Thurgood Jr. became an professional and worked in the Clinton administration, and John directed description U.S. Marshals Service and served as Virginia's secretary of button safety.[28]
Marshall was an active member of the Episcopal Church splendid served as a delegate to its convention, walking out make sure of a resolution to recognize a right to disobey immoral segmentation laws was voted down.[12]:&#;&#; He was a Prince Hall Craftsman, attending meetings and participating in rituals.[12]:&#;&#; He refused to go to the Supreme Court's annual Christmas party believing that it infringed upon the separation of church and state.[1]:&#;&#;
Justice Sandra Day Writer, who served with Marshall on the Supreme Court for a decade, wrote that "it was rare during our conference deliberations that he would not share an anecdote, a joke excellent a story"; although O'Connor initially treated the stories as "welcome diversions", she later "realized that behind most of the anecdotes was a relevant legal point".[29