Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney: Slavery, Secession, and the President's War Powers

by James F. Simon

Book Overview

The clashes between President Abraham Lincoln and Chief Justice Roger B. Taney over slavery, secession, and the president's constitutional war powers went to the heart of Lincoln's presidency. James... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 074325032X
• ISBN13: 9780743250320
• Release Date: November 2006
• Publisher: Simon & Schuster
• Length: 324 Pages
• Weight: 1.30 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.1" x 6.3" x 9.5"

Customer Reviews

Two lawyers and a Nation in crisis

It should be widely known that during the greatest crisis that has faced the US, the Civil War, Lincoln suspended the rights of habeas corpus and essentially bent the Constitution in order to save the Union. In James Simon's book "Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney: Slavery, Secession, and the President's War Powers" he gives us a fairly balanced approach in examining both sides of the issues facing the President and the Supreme Court as it relates to the Constitution and civil liberties. As a law professor Simon examines Justice Taney's rulings and Lincoln's position on civil matters that were affecting the Nation. His book shows how much of an uphill battle Justice Taney had to face when trying to fight the challenges to individual liberties. As the inevitable war approached, Lincoln didn't wait for Congress to return to session. He did all in his power to block any additional states from turning to help the Confederacy. This was especially true in Maryland Justice Taney's home state. Lincoln took the broad approach to Constitutional matters believing that he knew what the Founding Fathers had constitutionally desired for the Nation. Justice Taney maintained a more narrow Jeffersonian state's view. Simon relates Taney's early views expressed in a banking opinion while serving as Andrew Jackson's Attorney General. Reflecting Taney's words Andrew Jackson's states, "The opinion of the Supreme Court Judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion of congress has over the Judges, and on that point the President is independent of both" Jackson wrote. "The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control Congress or the Executive when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve." As Chief Justice during the Lincoln administration, Taney found himself greatly challenged to maintain this opinion. Simon covers the infamous "Dred Scott vs Sanford" opinion that haunted Taney and how it became a catalyst to move Lincoln forward and into the Presidency. Both Taney and Lincoln had respect for the rule of law. They both desired peace. Taney was willing to allow the states to peaceable leave the Union in order to prevent civil war. Simon reveals that Lincoln's goal was to repair the rupture to the constitutional government established by the framers even if that meant civil war. This is an important read in helping to understand the extraordinary powers assumed by the executive, with the consent of Congress, in times of emergencies and how when the emergency passes should be yielded up. In the epilogue Simon goes over several later Presidents and their use of war powers. He explains how Congress is the best check on the growing assumptions of Presidential war powers. The Supreme Court has been very reluctant to curb the president's powers especially when the Nation's security is at risk. Simon revealed how much Lincoln "appreciated that

Captivating Work of Legal History!

James Simon has been making a career out of writing great books that profile legal/political controversies. He has also written one about the Jefferson/Marshall, and then the Black/Frankfurter, fights. But not to worry. They are entertaining, all; this one is no exception. The primary concern of this book is to explore the differing visions - on practically all issues - between then president elect Lincoln and then Supreme Court Chief Justice Taney. Lincoln, from Illinois, was a moderate republican who believed in gradual emancipation of slavery and - most importantly here - sweeping presidential war powers combined with the illegality of Southern seccession. Taney, by contrast, was a quiet Baltimorean and democrat who believed in states rights, fidelity to (a more narrow view of the) Constitution, even during times of war, and the states rights to choose whether to condone slavery. Needless to say for those who know even the most cursory history - Lincoln won. While Simon does treat Taney with a tiny bit of hkostility, he is very careful to give him credit when credit is due. One of the main focuses of the book - the rightfully infamous decision in Dred Scott v Sandford, which saw Taney proclaim that Scott, a black man, could not bring a suit as he was not legally a person - is hard to justify by even the most generous legal mind. And Simon rightfully and flatly treats it to a stinging critique. This, as with several other Tany zingers. But SImon is also quick to point out that Taney wss first and foremost concerned with civil liberties during war time, against the president's sometimes Orwellian actions, such as his acts to shut down newspapers that did not sympathize with the Union, or his actions - yes, it is true - to arrest a priest who did not pray for the Union. When these are looked at by Simon, Taney comes out with at least some dignity. This book covers, first, both men's early years before going into the pre-civil war acts like Dred Scott and follows the trajectory of the entire civil war, highlighting the president's actions therein and Taney's (often ignored) responses to them. Legalese - have no fear - is kept to a minimum, and, in fact, the entire book reads like a historical thriller with a bit of courtroom drama. On a final note, I find this book prescient for today's times, becasue many of the debates that Taney and Lincoln had are debates we ourselves are having in the US today. Whether or not military tributnals can or should supplant judicial courts, whether habeas corpus can be suspended in war time, what it even means to bve at war (the debate then was whether or not you can be at war with your own country men, today it is whether you can be at war with a group not a state). Finally, there is whether the president's war powers give the president virtually unlimited authority to ignore other constitutional provisions. Prescient indeed! Anyhow, this is a good read for anyone interested in an in-depth study of the

Simon's Careful Craftsmanship

No legal historian can crunch through cases as carefully and insightfully as Professor James F. Simon. He was the first court scholar to grasp that the Rehnquist conservative counter revolution had reached its culmination by the mid 1990s, in "The Center Holds," and he is the first court scholar to give Roger Taney his due for superior lawyering in a long and distinguished career, in the pages of his new and informative book, "Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney." Simon's story reads like a well crafted novel, as it weaves back to the early careers of Lincoln and Taney, showing how their upbringings in Illinois and Maryland set the stage for their pivotal roles in the history of American slavery. Then the story moves fast forward to Taney's terrible decision in "Dred Scott" and the motivation that case played in the political career of Abraham Lincoln. Simon,a former Supreme Court reporter for Time Magazine, writes about Taney's legal career and Lincoln's legal career with an unequalled insight into the thinking of two brilliant lawyers and of the process that operates behind the closed doors of the nation's highest legal tribunal. The human element, however, is always acutely observed by Simon, and he takes the physical stamina of Lincoln, who endured numerous political setbacks, and Taney, who served actively on the court with numerous illnesses, into old age, into great account and into great detail. Once again, James F. Simon has carefully revealed the intracies of the law and the complexity of great lawyers in vivid detail and with painstaking accuracy. Hansen Alexander is an attorney and author most recently of the introductory law book, "A Tort is Not a Pastry."

Simon's Careful Craftsmanship

No legal historian can crunch through cases as carefully and insightfully as Professor James F. Simon. He was the first court scholar to grasp that the Rehnquist conservative counter revolution had reached its culmination by the mid 1990s, in "The Center Holds," and he is the first court scholar to give Roger Taney his due for superior lawyering in a long and distinguished career, in the pages of his new and informative book, "Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney." Simon's story reads like a well crafted novel, as it weaves back to the early careers of Lincoln and Taney, showing how their upbringings in Illinois and Maryland set the stage for their pivotal roles in the history of American slavery. Then the story moves fast forward to Taney's terrible decision in "Dred Scott" and the motivation that case played in the political career of Abraham Lincoln. Simon,a former Supreme Court reporter for Time Magazine, writes about Taney's legal career and Lincoln's legal career with an unequalled insight into the thinking of two brilliant lawyers and of the process that operates behind the closed doors of the nation's highest legal tribunal. The human element, however, is always acutely observed by Simon, and he takes the physical stamina of Lincoln, who endured numerous political setbacks, and Taney, who served actively on the court with numerous illnesses, into old age, into great account and into great detail. Once again, James F. Simon has carefully revealed the intracies of the law and the complexity of great lawyers in vivid detail and with painstaking accuracy. Hansen Alexander is an attorney and author most recently of the comic novel, "The Death of Chauvinism."]

A CLASH OF TITANS IN A RIVETING HISTORICAL BOOK

Five MONUMENTAL Stars!! Master historian James F. Simon has written a wonderfully-researched and incisively-written book describing a clash of two historical titans at one of the most critical historical crossroads of the United States of America: "the greatest civil war known in the history of the human race." And he hits every salient historical signpost along the way as he patiently develops and delineates the story. Primarily it's the story of two men rising to the top of their professions amid the ever-present and explosive issue of slavery that ripped apart a still-expanding young nation. But there is much more going on and he lays it out magnificently. Simon details how slavery was always the major issue between slave states and free states, among many other important issues. The description of the institution of slavery, the treatment of blacks, and the central role of the courts in this time period is a very sad, abhorrent chapter in our nation's history. Mr Simon has done the uninitiated reader a favor with his detailed background work on all of the issues and personalities involved. President Abraham Lincoln and United States Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney, both tall, imposing, God-fearing figures, bitterly opposed each other on three important points: slavery, secession, and President "Lincoln's constitutional authority during the Civil War". And the broad tapestry of this book includes all of the major players of that era: John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson, Nicholas Biddle, John Marshall, James Knox Polk, William Henry Harrison, John Tyler, Zachary Taylor, Franklin Pierce, Buchanan, Salmon Chase, and the ubiquitous "triumvirate" of Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, and John C. Calhoun, among many more. And then there were the intricacies of the major political parties: Democrats, Whigs, Know-Nothing, American, and Republicans. He covers the background of Taney and Lincoln in detail. In Lincoln's life we find a man who was always against the institution of slavery. At one point, Taney thought slavery was "evil" and freed his own slaves. But both wound up curiously at odds in later life for different reasons. Lincoln's economic beginnings from postman to early political candidate, Whig party member, and then member of the nascent Republican Party and eventually President were all based on one year of formal education and an unyielding lifelong zest for reading, learning, and memorization. Taney's life is likewise given a detail examination in fascinating prose. Simon carefully builds both the social/political climates and the laws at issue. He gives an overview of the relevant legal issues of the day: from the "Amistad" case to the Missouri Compromise (1820) to the annexation of Texas and the war with Mexico with it's consequent 'spoils' of half a billion acres of land to the Compromise of 1850 to the Fugitive Slave Act to the tense and bloody period of Dred Scott v. Sandford (where members of congress were armed and