representation. Hruska went on to note that not all Supreme Court judges could be Brandeises, Frankfurters, and Cardozos. A slim majority of senators refused to support a jurist who failed to meet high standards. On April 8, 1970, the Senate voted 51–48 to reject Carswell’s nomination. Despite Nixon’s dogged insistence that Carswell was a qualified candidate, 13 Republican senators voted against his confirmation. Nixon defended his unsuccessful nominee. Refusing to admit his candidate’s shortcomings, the president claimed that Carswell was opposed by the Senate because he was a conservative southerner and a believer in the “strict construc- tion,” or literal interpretation, of the U.S. Constitution. Nixon’s third nominee, HARRY A. BLACKMUN, of Minnesota, met with Senate approv- al and was confirmed without major incident. Shortly after his defeat Carswell resigned from the federal appeals court and announced his candidacy for U.S. senator from Florida. Carswell’s senatorial bid did not succeed and he returned to PRIVATE LAW practice in Tallahassee. Carswell died in 1992. FURTHER READINGS Dean, John W. 2001. The Rehnquist Choice: The Untold Story of the Nixon Appointment that Redefined the Supreme Court. New York: Free Press. Levy, Leonard. 1974. Against the Law: The Nixon Court and Criminal Justice. New York: Harper & Row. U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. 1974. A Judge on Trial. New York: Da Capo. CARTEL A combination of producers of any product joined together to control its production, sale, and price, so as to obtain a MONOPOLY and restrict competi- tion in any particular industry or commodity. Cartels exist primarily in Europe, being illegal in the United States under ANTITRUST LAWS. Also, an association by agreement of companies or sections of companies having common interests, designed to prevent extreme or UNFAIR COMPETITION and allocate markets, and to promote the interchange of knowledge resulting from scientific and techni- cal research, exchange of patent rights, and standardization of products. In war, an agreement between two hostile powers for the delivery of prisoners or deserters, or authorizing certain nonhostile intercourse between each other that would otherwise be prevented by the state of war, for example, agreements between enemies for intercommunication by post, tele- graph, telephone, or railway. Although illegal in the United States, foreign cartels influence prices within the United States on imported and smuggled goods that they control. The United States has sued the De Beers diamond cartel several times, and works to stop the flow of illegal narcotics, whose production and distribution are largely con- trolled by drug cartels. v CARTER, JAMES COOLIDGE James Coolidge Carter was a lawyer and leading legal scholar and philosopher of the late nineteenth century. Born into a poor family on October 14, 1827, in Lancaster, Massachusetts, Carter attended Derby Academy in Hingham, Massachusetts. In 1846 he entered Harvard College. An outstanding student, he graduated fourth in his class in 1850. He then moved to New York City to work as a private tutor and to study law. He returned to Cambridge a year later and enrolled in what was then known as the Dane Law School James Coolidge Carter 1827–1905 ❖ ❖ ◆ 1827 Born, Lancaster, Mass. ◆ 1853 Graduated from Dane Law School at Harvard 1891 Argued doctrine of "limited powers" of government before the Supreme Court in In re Dupre 1883 The Proposed Codification of Our Common Law published 1905 Died, New York City 1861–65 U.S. Civil War ◆ ◆ ◆ 1895 Defended the constitutionality of income tax before the Supreme Court in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. 1875 Appointed to commission charged with devising a plan for city governments in New York State 1914–18 World War I ◆ ◆ 1907 Law: Its Origin, Growth, and Function published posthumously 1913 Sixteenth Amendment ratified, authorized income taxes ▼▼ ▼▼ 1875 1900 1925 1825 1850 THE FUNCTION OF LAW [IS] THE MARKING OUT OF THE LARGEST AREA WITHIN WHICH EACH INDIVIDUAL COULD MOVE FREELY AND ACT WITHOUT INVADING THE LIKE FREEDOM IN EVERY OTHER —THAT IS, TO INSURE THE LARGEST POSSIBLE FREEDOM . —JAMES COOLIDGE CARTER GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 268 CARTEL at Harvard, graduating in 1853. Carter was then admitted to the New York state bar and clerked briefly before founding the firm of Scudder and Carter. He remained associated with the firm for the next fifty-two years. Carter quickly emerged as a highly skilled and sought-after lawyer. He also became a prominent leader of the New York bar, helping to form the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and serving as the association’s president for five terms. He had a strong interest in municipal reform and in 1875 he was appointed by the governor to a commission charged with devising a plan of government for the cities of New York State. He also helped found the National Munici- pal League and was its president for nine years. Later in his career Carter achieved national prominence as president of the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION from 1894 to 1895 and for his appearance as counsel for the United States before the Bering Sea Fur-Seal Tribunal of ARBITRATION in 1893. Carter’s opening argument before the tribunal in Paris reportedly lasted seven days. In addition to his involvement in municipal affairs, Carter devoted his energies to organizing opposition to a proposed civil code for the state of New York. Carter had long been an opponent of the code of procedure, which had been part of the law since 1846, calling it an embarrass- ment to the practicing bar. In 1883 he authored The Proposed Codification of Our Common Law, a widely distributed pamphlet outlining his views, which was influential in the code’s eventual defeat in the state legislature. Carter believed that any scheme to reduce the law to statutes was fundamentally unsound and simply could not be carried out. Even if it could be accomplished, he argued, codification was undesirable because “[l]aw is not a command or body of commands, but consists of rules springing from the social standard of justice or from the habits and customs from which that standard has itself been derived.” He went on to write and speak extensively on the issue of codification throughout his life and his lectures were published after his death as Law: Its Origin, Growth, and Function (1907). Carter strongly believed in restraints on legislative powers and he applied his legal philosophy to important cases he argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. In In re Dupre, 143 U.S. 110, 12 S. Ct. 374, 36 L. Ed. 93 (1891), Carter argued that Congress lacked the authority to prohibit as crim inal the use of the mails for the circulation of lottery tickets. According to Carter, the federal government could use the powers granted to it by the Constitution for only limited purposes, and to exceed such limits through the law in question usurped the powers reserved to the states under the TENTH AMENDMENT. Carter’s doctrine of “limited powers” would be used by other lawyers and scholars to restrict congressio- nal control over interstate commerce and taxes. Carter again argued for a limited govern- ment role in Smyth v. Ames, 169 U.S. 466, 18 S. Ct. 418, 42 L. Ed. 819 (1898), in which the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether Nebraska could force its railroads to lower their shipping rates in an attempt to ease economic conditions for farmers. Carter, one of several prominent lawyers representing the railroads, maintained that the shipping charges should be determined not by the state but by “laissez-faire” economics and free competition, which would prevent the imposition of high rates. The Court struck down the law at issue as unconstitutional, but also set guidelines for rate regulation by the states so that future court challenges could be avoided. Carter created somewhat of a stir among his fellow legal scholars when, in what initially appeared to be a drastic departure from his usual views, he joined a team of other promi- nent lawyers to defend the constitutionality of an INCOME TAX before the U.S. Supreme Court in Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co., 158 U.S. 601, 15 S. Ct. 912, 39 L. Ed. 1108 (1895). Carter argued that the legislature’s action in passing the tax must be given due weight and should not be subject to review by a judicial tribunal. Just as government should play a limited role, he contended, the courts’ role should be likewise restricted. He argued that the courts should refrain from engaging in “judicial lawmaking” and said, “nothing could be more unwise and dangerous—nothing more foreign to the spirit of the Constitution—than an attempt to baffle and defeat a popular determination by a judgment in a lawsuit … the only path to safety is to accept the voice of the majority as final.” The Supreme Court went on to strike down the general income tax enacted by Congress and held that taxes on income derived from REAL ESTATE and PERSONAL PROPERTY constituted direct taxes and thus must be apportioned among the states according to population. The decision was GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION CARTER, JAMES COOLIDGE 269 effectively negated by the adoption and ratifica- tion in 1913 of the SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT, which exempted income taxes from the Constitution’s apportionment requirement, but Pollock was nevertheless long remembered because of the fervor with which it was argued by Carter and the other attorneys involved. After his retirement from the PRACTICE OF LAW , Carter devoted his time to writing and studying and remained a popular lecturer until his death in 1905 at the age of 78. FURTHER READINGS Congressional Quarterly. 2004. Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court. 4th ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly. Elliott, Stephen P., ed. 1986. A Reference Guide to the United States Supreme Court. New York: Facts on File. Grossman, Lewis A. 2002. “James Coolidge Carter and Mugwump Jurisprudence.” Law and History Review 20, no. 3 (fall). Available online at http://www.history cooperative.org/journals/lhr/20.3/forum_grossman.html; website homepage: http://www.historycooperative.org (accessed July 11, 2009). Johnson, John W., ed. 2001. Historic U.S. Court Cases: An Encyclopedia. 2d ed. New York: Routledge. v CARTER, JAMES EARL, JR. As the 39th PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, JIMMY CARTER represented a historical change in national politics. He was the first modern president to be elected from the Deep South. Following a successful career in Ge orgia— where he was a peanut farmer, state senator, and then governor—Carter entered the White House in January 1977 as a political outsider at a time of distrust in elected officials. His Baptist upbringing guided him in his vis ion of the office as a post to be used for the nation’s moral leadership. However, his presidency was one of only limited success in both its domestic and international endeavors, and voters rejected him for a second term in 1980 by electing RONALD REAGAN in a landslide that marked a new era of Republican control of the EXECUTIVE BRANCH. After leaving Washington, D.C., Carter began a revitalized public life as a prominent human rights activist and diplomat, addressing pro- blems of war, famine, and repression around the globe. The small farming town of Plains, Georgia, was Carter’s birthplace on October 1, 1924. James Earl Carter Sr., a veteran of WORLD WAR I, farmed cotton and had a general store. He was conservative, strict, and a firm believer in his son, whom he nicknamed “Hot,” for Hotshot— because, Carter said, “Daddy never assumed I would fail at anything.” Lillian Gordy Carter was a registered nurse. As devout Baptists, the parents expected much from Carter and their three other children. Religion meant steadfast- ness and a call to charity, as Carter’s mother demonstrated by caring for patients without charge. Archery, their community, was predom- inantly African American. The young Carter worked and played with his black neighbors and, like them, lived without household plumb- ing or electricity. The experience, along with the virtues of hard work, frugality, and aspiration taught by his parents, shaped the politician he James Earl Carter Jr. 1924– ▼▼ ▼▼ ❖ ◆◆ ◆ ◆◆◆ ◆◆ ◆ 1924 Born, Plains, Ga. 1939–45 World War II 1950–53 Korean War 1961–73 Vietnam War 1962–66 Served in Georgia state senate 1984–87 Began work with Habitat for Humanity; established Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter Work Project 1946 Graduated from Annapolis; entered U.S. Navy Officer corps 1953 Returned to Plains, Ga. 1970 Elected governor of Georgia 1993 Traveled to Africa to assist in innoculations ◆◆ 2008 Monitored elections in Nepal 1997 Met Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in Plains, Ga. 1999 Awarded, with wife Rosalynn Carter, the Presidential Medal of Freedom 2001 An Hour Before Daylight: Memoirs of a Rural Boyhood published 2002 Awarded Nobel Peace Prize; first U.S. president to visit Cuba since Fidel Castro seized power in 1959 ◆ 1982 Joined faculty of Emory University in Atlanta; Keeping Faith: Memoirs of a President published; founded The Carter Center ◆ 1980 Defeated in reelection bid by Ronald Reagan ◆ 1979 Brokered peace treaty between Egypt and Israel; Iranian militants seized U.S. embassy in Tehran ◆ 1976 Elected 39th president of U.S. 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq 2009 We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land published 1925 2000 1975 GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 270 CARTER, JAMES EARL, JR. later became. After graduating at the top of his high school class, Carter paid for college with money he had earned and invested by selling peanuts as a boy. Carter’s ambition was naval service. Prepar- ing to enter the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland, he studied mathematics at Georgia Southwestern College and then the Georgia INSTITUTE of Technology. In 1943 he entered Annapolis; he graduated in the top tenth of his class with a bachelor of sciences degree. Soon he married a long-time acquaintance, Rosalynn Smith, and began in earnest to pursue his career in the U.S. Navy. He worked as an instructor, saw battleship and submarine duty, and ultimately qualified as a sub commander. He served as senior officer aboard the Sea Wolf, the navy’s second atomic submarine. He left the service in 1953 after attaining the rank of lieutenant. The decision to walk away from a promising career came when Carter faced a personal crossroads. His father had died, leaving a powerful legacy: The one-time cotton farmer had become a successful warehouse operator, peanut seed seller, and, finally, member of the Georgia House of Representatives. Carter now followed his father’s example in business and politics. In his first year as a peanut farmer, he scratched out an income of $200, yet soon the business flourished. Success in political life took longer. Carter quickly became active in civic affairs. He opposed SEGREGATION, scorned the local White Citizen’s Council, and tried to integrate his church. In the 1950s South, such views spelled trouble. When he ran for the Democratic nomination for the state senate in 1962 his opponents stuffed ballot boxes to defeat him. Only after a long legal fight did a court invalidate the nomination because of FRAUD and turn it over to Carter. He won the election. State politics established Carter nationally. In two terms as a state senator, from 1962 to 1966, his political philosophy was traditionally liberal yet also bore the mark of a technocrat: He advocated CIVIL RIGHTS, welfare, and open government, while insisting on careful budget- ing to ensure fiscal responsibility. In 1966, his first run for the governor’s office failed but he won the election in 1970. Representing broad political and social changes shaping the region, Carter’s governorship helped shake Georgia out of its segregationist past; he appointed African Americans to state govern- ment and fostered biracial cooperation through citizens groups. As an administrator he special- ized in micromanagement, ordering frequent, strict review of all publicly funded programs. By 1974 Carter was rising within the national DEMOCRATIC PARTY. His exposure grew as he served as chairman of its campaign committee, and, fulfilling an ambition that began with his election as governor, announced his candidacy for president. Carter’s campaign message was integrity. The United States had just suffered through the VIETNAM WAR and the WATERGATE scandal, pro- ducing widespread cynicism concerning elected officials. Carter’s opponent, GERALD R. FORD, had pardoned Nixon, the man behind Watergate. Carter positioned himself as an honest, openly religious man beyond the political intrigues of Washington. The peanut-farmer-turned- governor seemed to promise a new voice in government and a new set of ideals. At the start of the campaign voters responded eagerly: Carter and his running mate, Walter F. Mon- dale, led the incumbent, GERALD FORD, and his running mate, Bob Dole, by 30 percentage points. By election day, however, the race was a dead heat. Carter won by the smallest margin since the first World War—57 ELECTORAL COLLEGE votes. The new president walked along Pennsylvania Avenue in his inaugural parade, making a symbolic gesture that would be repeated in the thoroughly populist trappings Jimmy Carter. JIM SPELLMAN / WIRE- IMAGE / GETTY IMAGES AMERICA DID NOT INVENT HUMAN RIGHTS .IN A VERY REAL SENSE … HUMAN RIGHTS INVENTED AMERICA. —JIMMY CARTER GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION CARTER, JAMES EARL, JR. 271 of the Carter White House—fireside chats and radio call-in shows, simple furnishings, and fewer limousines. “We must adjust to changing times,” he said in his inaugural speech, “and still hold to unchanging principles.” Carter’s domestic policies focuse d on civil rights, welfare, tax reform , and budgetary control. Almost immediately, however, two major domestic concerns began to dictate his agenda. One was the nation’s energy supply. In the late 1970s a severe energy crisis produced the worst fuel shortage in U.S. history coupled with rising international prices for oil. Congress cooperated with Carter’s remedies by approving fuel conservation policies, deregulating natural gas prices, and passing a windfall tax on oil company profits. He did not get everything he wanted: A federal court blocked his attempt to decontrol domestic oil prices and Congress denied him authority for gasoline rationing. The second major problem was the economy, which worsened over the course of his term. His efforts to fight inflation—especially controls on consumer credit—produced a recession. Voters grew disgruntled. His approval rating fell and a July 1979 speech in which he blamed the nation’s problems on a spiritual “malaise” was disastrous: afterward, a New York Times poll showed that for the first time ever, U.S. citizens, who traditionally had responded 2–1 that they were optimistic about the future, now said nearly 2–1 that they were pessimistic. Foreign policy gave Carter triumphs and failures. He made human rights a top priority in the relationships between the United States and foreign nations, directing SECRETARY OF STATE Cyrus R. Vance to set a new standard: Social and economic rights were to be as important as political and civil rights. Liberals praised the policy; conservatives attacked it as muddled and inconsistently applied. Critics were divided over a controversial treaty with Panama to relinquish control of the Panama Canal by 2000, a move the U.S. Senate barely approved. Carter’s indisputable triumph was a peace treaty he secured between long-time enemies Israel and Egypt. But he took much of the blame for a SEIZURE of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by Iranian militants in November 1979. A military rescue mission in 1980 failed and the 52 U.S. HOSTAGES were released only after Carter left office. Further weakening the presidency were scandals within the administration. Andrew Young, his ambassador to the UNITED NATIONS, resigned amid revelations that he had secretly met members of the Palestine Liberation Organization, in violation of U.S. policy. Bert Lance, director of the OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET , also resigned in disgrace; he was charged with UNETHICAL CONDUCT in his former banking career. And Carter’s brother, Billy Carter, caused the president embarrassment. Often seen as a comical figure who had cashed in on Carter’s fame by lending his name to a drink called “Billy Beer,” Billy was revealed to have conducted business with Libya, an enemy nation. A Sen ate subcommittee report on the incident blamed Carter for not reining in his brother. By late 1980 Carter had the lowest approval rating of any U.S. president in modern history. Even after an extensive cabinet shake-up, his administration was in disarray. Critics lambasted his policies and, particularly, his methods: He was considered to be too mired in details to execute bold decisions. Editorial cartoonists frequently lampooned him as either a country bumpkin or a hapless, childlike figure, echoing the prevailing sentiment that Carter was incapable of runnin g the country. To make matters worse the Democratic Party effectively deserted him. Senator EDWARD M. KENNEDY (D-Mass.) nearly captured the party’s presidential nomination and his supporters gained control of the party’splatformover Carter’s objections. Republicans sensed a bloodbath, and they got it in Ronald Reagan’s landslide victory. Typical of the post-Carter-era assessments was that of historian Burton I. Kaufman, whose 1993 book, The Presidency of James Earl Carter, scathingly judged Carter as “lacking in leader- ship, ineffective in dealing with Congress, incapable of defending America’s honor abroad, and uncertain about its purpose, priorities and sense of direction.” Carter’s defenders have largely chosen to blame his 1980 loss on intractable national problems that he did not create as well as on the overwhelming popularity of his opponent. “He didn’t have the charisma of a Reagan,” Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill Jr., former Democratic Speaker of the House, observed. “He couldn’t pull it off.” Some inside observers saw Carter’s presidency as less a failure than a poor match of his abilities. The author Hendrik Hertzberg, a former Carter speechwriter, argued, “He was, and is, more of a moral leader than a political leader.” GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 272 CARTER, JAMES EARL, JR. Although Carter’s return to Georgia after his 1980 defeat might have been ignominious, it proved otherwise. After his departure from Washington, Carter immersed himself in schol- arly and humanitarian pursuits. He worked at Emory University as a profe ssor and later as a visiting lecturer. In conjunction with Emory he established the Carter Center which is a nonprofit organization dedicated to advocating for human rights, conflict resolution, and the enhancement of democracy, along with the creation of initiatives to improve health. Carter and his wife, Rosalynn, are particu- larly committed to providing housing for those who are in need, both in the United States and abroad. They work closely with the nonprofit group Habitat for Humanity, and they estab- lished the Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter Work Project, which dedicates one week per year to building houses in a designated location. The 2009 Project focused on Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam; other previous locales include India, Mexico, South Africa, and the United States. “This is the kind of thing I enjoy doing. The alternative is to loa f around the house and spend my time playing golf or fishing,” Carter told a Canadian newswe ekly. Always the diplomat, Carter remained a force in world affairs with human rights as his focal point. He monitored elections in Central America; negotiated further peace in the Middle East; supervised inoculation programs for children in Africa and elsewhere; and traveled on diplomatic missions to North Korea, Bosnia, Haiti, and the Sudan. In 1999, President BILL CLINTON presented Carter and former first lady Rosalynn Carter with the natio n’s highest civilian award, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Traveling as a private citizen , Carter visited Cuba in May 2002 and met with President Fidel Castro. Carter, who had voiced his opposition to the continuing embargo of Cuba by the United States, expressed his interest in meeting with religious groups and human rights acti- vists. His efforts to mend relations with Cuba did not prevent Carter from criticizing Cuba’s communist system. He openly promoted the Valera Project, a reform movement proposed by Cuban dissidents calling for social change and such basic rights as free speech. Carter also continues to be a prolific author. While teaching at Emory, he wrote several books whose topics ranged from politics to poetry. In 2001 Carter published a well-received autobiography titled An Hour before Daylight: Memories of a Rural Boyhood, which was nominated for the Pulitzer Prize. With the release of his historical novel The Hornet’s Nest, in 200 3, Carter became the first president to publish a work of fiction. In December 2002 Carter was presented with the Nobel Peace Prize. The selection committee noted Carter’s tireless efforts to help bring about the 1979 Camp David peace accord between Israel and Egypt as well as his consistent attempts to mediate and ameliorate international problems. In his acceptance speech, Carter explained that he has come to see the concept of peace as on e that embraces the need for shelter, food, health care, and the opportunity for economic development. Carter continues his work with the Carter Center, committed to advancing human rights and alleviating unnecessary human suffering. His most recent book, published in early 2009, is We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land: A Plan That Will Work. Before that, 2006 saw another title dealing with his hope for peace in the Middle East, which was Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. FURTHER READINGS The Carter Center. Available online at www.cartercenter .org (accessed August 13, 2009). Bourne, Peter G. 1997. Jimmy Carter: A Comprehensive Biography from Plains to Post-Presidency. New York: Scribner. Carter, Jimmy. 1982. Keeping Faith: Memoirs of a President. New York: Bantam Books. Gaillard, Frye. 2007. Prophet from Plains: Jimmy Carter and His Legacy. Athens, GA: Univ. of Georgia Press. “Jimmy Carter Says Adios to Cuba.” May 17, 2002. CBSnew .com: World. Available online at www.cbsnews.com/ stories/2002/05/12/world/main508729.shtml (accessed August 13, 2009). Jimmy Carter Work Project. Available online at www. habitat.org/jcwp/2009 (accessed August 13, 2009). v CARTER, ROBERT LEE Robert Lee Carter is a federal district court judge who, as counsel for the National Associa- tion for the Advancement of Colored People ( NAACP), played a pivotal role in the SCHOOL DESEGREGATION cases of the 1950s. Carter argued BROWN V . BOARD OF EDUCATION, 347 U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686, 98 L. Ed. 873 (1954), before the U.S. Supreme Court. THE BROWN DECISION WAS HISTORIC , NOT BECAUSE OF WHAT IT HAS ACCOMPLISHED IN THE FIELD OF EDUCATION , BUT BECAUSE OF THE TRANSFORMATION IT HAS MADE IN THE WHOLE COMPLEX OF RACE RELATIONS IN THIS COUNTRY . —ROBERT CARTER GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION CARTER, ROBERT LEE 273 Carter was born March 11, 1917, in Caryville, Florida. As a child he moved to New Jersey, where he attended public schools in Newark and East Orange. He received his bachelor of arts degree from Lincoln University, in Pennsylvania, in 1937, then went on to earn a bachelor of laws degree from Howard University Law School, graduating magna cum laude in 1940. He also earned a master of laws degree from Columbia University in 1941. With WORLD WAR II heating up, Carter entered the Army Air Force where he encoun- tered racism and SEGREGATION. During his time in the army he pressed charges against two white soldiers who had harassed him with racial slurs. He also refused to live off base as black soldiers were required to do. Because of his outspoken defiance of segregation he was transferred to a different base. Later he successfully defended a black soldier charged with raping a white woman. In retaliation for his participation in the case he was given an administrative discharge, which is neither honorable nor dishonorable and leaves the recipient open to being drafted. He enlisted the help of his mentor and former law professor, WILLIAM H. HASTIE, who would later become the first African American to sit as a lifetime federal judge outside the Virgin Islands. Hastie represented Carter in a petition before the discharge review board, which finally granted Carter an honorable discharge. When Carter left the army, he had achieved the rank of second lieutenant. After leaving military service, Carter became assistant special counsel with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF), a position he held from 1945 to 1946. In 1948 he became director of veterans’ affairs for American Veterans (AMVETS), where he served until 1949. In 1950 Carter returned to the NAACP and joined the fight for CIVIL RIGHTS. In 1951 he brought an innovative challenge to the separate- but-equal doctrine when he summoned social scientist Kenneth B. Clark as a witness for the plaintiffs in Briggs v. Elliott (98 F. Supp. 529 [E.D.S.C. 1951]). Clark testified that his research with black children indicated that their self- image and self-esteem were damaged by any system that separated them from their white peers, whether the system was equal or not. At the time, this was highly unorthodox evidence to present at trial. Although the court ruled against the plaintiffs in Briggs, “by holding that segregation of the races in the public schools, as required by the federal constitution and South Carolina state law, was not of itself a denial of the EQUAL PROTECTION of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment,” Clark’s testimony had set the stage for the arguments that would be presented in Brown and other school desegregation cases. Briggs was later appealed with several other cases, including Brown, which Carter argued and won. His victory in Brown established him as a preeminent civil rights attorney and he went on to participate in the appeals of scores of other cases. Carter continued as an assistant special counsel with the NAACP until becoming general counsel in 1956. He remained with the NAACP for 13 more years before leaving to enter private practice. During his years of practice Carter argued 22 cases before the Supreme Court, winning all but one. In 1972 President RICHARD M. NIXON appointed Carter to be a U.S. district judge for the Southern District of New York. During his long and distinguished career, Carter has received numerous awards and recognitions. ▼▼ ▼▼ Robert Lee Carter 1917– 1905 1950 1975 2000 1925 ❖ ◆◆◆ ◆◆ ◆ ◆ ◆◆ 1914–18 World War I 1917 Born, Caryville, Fl. 1941 Joined Army Air Force 1945–46 Served as special counsel with NAACP Legal Defense Fund 1939–45 World War II 1950–53 Korean War 1961–73 Vietnam War 1954 Argued Brown v. Board of Education before U.S. Supreme Court 1971 Public school busing to achieve integration began 1972 Appointed U.S. district judge for the Southern District of New York 1978 U.S. Supreme Court rejected racial quotas in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 2004 Received Thurgood Marshall Lifetime Achievement Award 1986 Assumed status of senior judge 2001 Presided over the trial of former Teamsters Union president Ron Carey 1995 Received Federal Bar Council’s Emory Buckner Medal for Outstanding Public Service GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 274 CARTER, ROBERT LEE He was named a Columbia University Urban Fellow (1968–69) and has served as an adjunct professor at New York University Law School (1965–70), Yale University (1975–77), and the University of Michigan Law School (1977). In 1991, he served as a Shikes Fellow at Harvard University. He holds honorary degrees from numerous institutions including Howard Uni- versity School of Law; Lincoln University, in Pennsylvania; Northeastern University; and the College of the Holy Cross. Carter was a recipient of Howard University’s Alumni Award for Distinguished Postgraduate Achievement. In 1995, the Federal Bar Council awarded its Emory Bucknor Medal for Outstanding Public Service to Judge Carter. In December 1986 Carter became a senior judge on the court and since then, has continued to be actively involved in a number of important case s. One example included a 25-year-old discrimination case where a New York City sheet metal workers union was ordered to make millions of dollars in back pay to minority workers who claimed that they were denied work opportunities. In 2001 Carter presided over the four-week trial of former Teamster president Ron Carey on federal PERJURY charges. The trial, which was interrupted by the September 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center, ended in an ACQUITTAL for Carey. Along with his work on the bench, Carter also continues to lecture in the United States and abroad, publish articles and essays in numerous publications, and sit on boards, committees, and task forces devoted to ending discrimination and furthering social justice. In 2004 Carter received the THURGOOD MARSHALL Lifetime Achievement Award. FURTHER READINGS “Judge Carter and the Brown Decision”. Available online at <www.oah.org/pubs/nl/2004feb/sullivan.html> (accessed August 13, 2009). Kohn, Alan. 1987. “Judge Carter’s Career Marked by Principle over Pragmatism.” New York Law Journal 197 (January 2). “NAACP Awards 2004 Spingarn Medal to Judge Robert L. Carter”. Available online at www.naacp.org/news/2004/ 2004-06-15.html (accessed August 13, 2009). Wise, Daniel. 1989. “Judge in Princeton-Newport: ‘Flinty, With Keen Moral Sense.’” New York Law Journal 201 (June 19). CROSS REFERENCES Marshall, Thurgood; Warren Court. v CARTER, THOMAS HENRY Thomas Henry Carter, born Octobe r 30, 1854, in Scioto County, Ohio, concentrated his career efforts in Montana. He pursued legal studies and relocated to Helena in 1882 where he established a successful law practice. In 1889 Montana was admitted as a state to the United States, and Carter became its first representative to participate in Congress. In this capacity he favored less stringent laws concerning homesteaders. In 1890 he became commissioner of the general land office and was able to put his views into effect, to the advantage of the Western settlers. In 1892 he was the presiding officer of the Republican National Committee and directed the unsuc- cessful reelection campaign of President BENJAMIN HARRISON . Carter entered a new phase of his career in 1895 when he became a U.S. senator. He represented Montana until 1901 and again from 1905 to 1911. During his tenure he supported Thomas Henry Carter 1854–1911 ❖ 1854 Born, Scioto County, Ohio 1861–65 U.S. Civil War ◆ 1882 Moved to Helena, Montana; established law practice ◆ ◆ ◆ ❖ ◆ 1890 Appointed commissioner of the general land office by President Harrison 1889 Montana admitted to U.S. statehood 1895–1901 Served first term in U.S. Senate 1904 Reelected to second term in U.S. Senate 1911 Died, Helena, Montana 1910 Glacier National Park established 1914–18 World War I ▼▼ ▼▼ 18501850 1925 1925 19001900 18751875 OUR CONSTITUENTS ARE NOT CHILDREN . Y OU ARE DEALING WITH A GOOD , HUSKY, LUSTY, VIGOROUS BODY OF PEOPLE , WHO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THEIR OWN BUSINESS AND ARE DETERMINED TO HAVE THEIR RIGHTS . —THOMAS CARTER GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION CARTER, THOMAS HENRY 275 various policies, including bimetallism—the use of both gold and silver as the foundation of the currency system; CIVIL SERVICE legislation; a protective TARIFF on raw materials—such as wool, lumber, and lead; and a postal savings system. He also worked extensively in the field of conservation and was instrumental in the establishment of Glacier National Park. Carter died September 17, 1911, in Helena. CASE A general term for any action, cause of action, lawsuit, or controversy. All the evidence and testimony compiled and organized by one party in a lawsuit to prove that party’s version of the controversy at a trial in court. CASE AGREED ON An action in which the parties submit a formal written enumeration of facts that they both accept as correct and complete so that a judge can render a decision based upon conclusions of law that can be drawn from the stated facts. The parties mu st agree on all material facts upon which their rights are to be determined. They do not, however, agree upon the legal effects of those facts; therefore, the action presents a JUSTICIABLE controversy, which makes it a matter for judicial determination. The need for a jury trial is obvi ated because there are no questions of fact presented for resolution. A case agreed on is also known as an AMICABLE ACTION,aCASE STATED,oraFRIENDLY SUIT. CASE IN CHIEF The portion of a trial whereby the party with the burden of proof in the case presents its evidence. The term differs from a rebuttal, whereby a party seeks to contradict the other party’s evidence. Case in chief differs from “case” in that the latter term encompasses the evidence presented by both the party with the burden of proof and the party with the burden of rebutting that evidence. FURTHER READINGS Glannon, Joseph W. 2008. Civil Procedure: Examples and Explanations. 6th ed. Frederick, MD: Aspen. Kane, Mary Kay. 2007. Civil Procedure in a Nutshell. 6th ed. St. Paul, MN: West Law School. Roth, Leonard M. 2000. “Rules Regarding Trial and Trial Testimony.” FindLaw for Legal Professionals. Available online at http://library.findlaw.com/2000/Aug/1/127636. html; website home page: http://library.findlaw.com (accessed August 29, 2009). CROSS REFERENCES Burden of Proof; Rebut. CASE LAW Legal principles enunciated and embodied in judicial decisions that are derived from the application of particular areas of law to the facts of individual cases. As opposed to statutes—legislative acts that proscribe certain conduct by demanding or prohibiting something or that declare the legality of particular acts—case law is a dynamic and constantly developing body of law. Each case contains a portion wherein the facts of the controversy are set forth as well as the holding and dicta—an explanation of how the judge arrived at a particular conclusion. In addition, a case might contain concurring and dissenting opinions of other judges. Because the U.S. legal system has a common- law system, higher court decisions are binding on lower courts in cases with similar facts that raise similar issues. The concept of PRECEDENT,or STARE DECISIS, means to follow or adhere to previously decided cases in judging the case Thomas Henry Carter. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 276 CASE at bar. It means that appellate case law should be considered as binding upon lower courts. CASE METHOD A system of instruction or study of law focused upon the analysis of court opinions rather than lectures and textbooks; the predominant method of teaching in U.S. law scho ols today. CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS LANGDELL, a law pro- fessor, often receives credit for inventing the case method although historians have found evidence that others were teaching by this method before him. Regardless, Langdell by all accounts popularized the case method. Langdell viewed the law as a science and believed that it should be studied as a science. Law, he said, consists of certain principles or doctrines. To have such a mastery of these as to be able to apply them with constant facility and certainty to the ever-tangled skein of human affairs, is what constitutes a true lawyer; and hence to acquire that mastery should be the business of every earnest student of law. Each doctrine, Langdell said, arrived at its present state by slow degrees, growing and extending through centuries. Langdell’s beliefs differed from those of his law professor colleagues. Throughout the 1800s the prevalent approach for teaching law school classes was the lecture method. Although professors and text- books interpreted the meaning of various court decisions, they did not offer a significant opportunity for students to do so on their own. The case method, on the other hand, forced students to read, analyze, and interpret cases themselves. It was Langdell’s opinion that law students would be better educated if they were asked to reach their own conclusions about the meaning of judicial decisions. Langdell’s ideas were, at first, overwhelmingly rejected by students, other law professors, and attorneys alike. These critics viewed the case method as chaotic compared with organized lectures. They believed that instead of soliciting law students’ opinions regarding cases, professors should simply state their own interpretations. Law students, afraid that they were not learning from Langdell’s method, dropped out of his class, leaving him with only a few pupils. Enrollment in the Harvard Law School decreased dramatically because of concern over Langdell’scasemethod and alumni called for his dismissal. But the president of Harvard University, Charles W. Eliot, supported Langdell and his case method. This backing allowed Langdell to withstand the criticism long enough to prove the case method’s success: Langdell’s students were becoming capable, skilled attorneys. In 1870 Langdell became law school dean. As time passed he replaced his critics on the Harvard faculty with professors who believed in his system of teaching and the case method soon became the dominant teaching metho d at Harvard. Other U.S. law schools took note. By the early 1900s, most had adopted the case method, and it remained the primary method of legal instruction throughout the twentieth century and beyond. The case method is usually coupled with a type of classroom teaching called the Socratic method. Through the Socratic method students orally respond to an often difficult series of questions designed to help them gain further insight into the meaning of the law. Students learn the skill of critical analysis this way: they learn to discern relevant from irrelevant facts; they learn to distinguish between seemingly similar facts and issues; and they learn to analogize between dissimilar facts and issues. The case method offers certain benefits. For one, cases are usuall y interesting. They involve real parties with real problems and therefore tend to stimulate students more than do textbooks with only hypothetical problems. The case method also helps students devel- op the ability to read and analyze cases, which is a crucial skill for attorneys. Students learn to reduce cases to four basic components: the facts of the controversy; the legal issue that the court decides; the holding, or legal resolution, that the court reaches; and the reasoning that the court uses to explain its decision. Students, especially in their first year of legal study, often outline these components in written case briefs, to which they can refer during classes and while they prepare for exams. Another advantage of the case method is that it teaches, by example, the system of legal precedence. By reading cases, students learn how and why judges adhere, or do not adhere, to law developed in previous cases. Students also learn how judges have the discretion to create law by construing statutes or constitutions. The case method continues to have critics. One criticism focuses on law school GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION CASE METHOD 277 . Elected 39th president of U.S. 20 03 U.S. invasion of Iraq 20 09 We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land published 1 925 20 00 1975 GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 27 0 CARTER, JAMES EARL,. THEIR RIGHTS . —THOMAS CARTER GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION CARTER, THOMAS HENRY 27 5 various policies, including bimetallism—the use of both gold and silver as the foundation of the currency. http://library.findlaw.com /20 00/Aug/1/ 127 636. html; website home page: http://library.findlaw.com (accessed August 29 , 20 09). CROSS REFERENCES Burden of Proof; Rebut. CASE LAW Legal principles