Republicans maintained control over Con- gress in the 1996 and 1998 elections, but the margin of the majority following the 1998 elections was the narrowest in more than 30 years. Fellow Republican me mbers of Congress largely blamed Gingrich for the difficulties during the elections . Amid increasing dissen- sion, Gingrich resigned both as the Speaker of the House and as a representative in 1999. After he left politics, Gingrich founded the Gingrich Group, a communications and man- agement consulting firm based in Atlanta. In 2003 he founded the Center for Health Transformation, d escribed as a collection of private and public sector leaders dedicated to a twenty-first-century intelligent health system. In 2007 Gingrich founded American Solutions for Winning the Future, a nonprofit organiza- tion dedicated to developing solutions to America’s challenges and mobilizing the grass- roots energy to implement them. Gingrich serves as chair of the organization and also as a senior fellow for both the American Enterprise INSTITUTE in Washington, D.C., and the Hoover INSTITUTION at Stanford University. In 2001 he was named a distinguished visiting scholar at the National Defense University. He has served as a political analyst in the media and is generally recognized for his expertise in such areas as world history, military issues, and international affairs. Gingrich has written 13 FICTION and nonfic- tion books since leaving office, including the New York Times best sellers Winning the Future (2005) and Real Change (2008), and the best- selling active history novels Gettysburg (2003), Pearl Harbor (2007), and Days of Infamy (2008). He resides in Virginia with his third wife, Callista, who serves as the president of Gingrich Productions. FURTHER READINGS Gingrich, Newt. 2008. Real Change: From the World That Fails to the World That Works. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc. ———. 2006. Rediscovering God in America. Franklin, TN: Integrity House. ———. 2005. Winning the Future: A 21st Century Contract with America. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc. ———. 1995. To Renew America. New York: HarperCollins. Gingrich, Newt, with David Drake and Marianne Gingrich. 1984. Window of Opportunity. Tom Doherty Associates. Gugliotta, Guy, and Juliet Eilperin. 1998. “Gingrich Steps Down in Face of Rebellion.” Washington Post (November 7). “The Long March of Newt Gingrich.” PBS: Frontline. Available online at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/ frontline/newt; website home page: http://www.pbs. org (accessed July 26, 2009). 1995–1996 Official Congressional Directory, 104th Congress. 1995. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Wilkins, David. 1991. “Newt Gingrich.” Newsmakers 1991. Edited by Louise Mooney. Detroit: Gale Research. CROSS REFERENCES Contract with America; Election Campaign Financing. GINNIE MAE See GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION. v GINSBURG, DOUGLAS HOWARD Douglas Howard Ginsburg became the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA in 2001 after serving as an associate judge since 1986. In 1987 his nomina- tion to the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES was derailed by questions about his inexperi- ence and about his personal life. Ginsburg was born May 25, 1946, in Chicago. He grew up in Chicago, where he graduated from the prestigious Latin School in 1963. After high school, he entered Cornell University, in Ithaca, New York, but he left college in the mid- 1960s to open the nation’s first computerized dating service. After achieving success with the company, which was named Operation Match, Ginsburg sold his interest and returned to Cornell, earning his bachelor’sdegreein1970. From there, he went to the University of Chicago Law School, where he received his doctor of JURISPRUDENCE degree in 1973. Ginsburg served as a law clerk to U.S. circuit judge Carl McGowan from 1973 to 1974, and to Justice THURGOOD MARSHALL, of the U.S. Supreme Court, from 1974 to 1975. In 1975 he became an assistant professor of law at Harvard Law School, and in 1981 he was promoted to the rank of professor. He left academia to become a deputy assistant attorney general for regulatory affairs in the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Antitrust Division, in 1983. A year later he was appointed administrator for information and regulatory affairs of the OFFICE OF MANAGE- MENT AND BUDGET , where he served for one year before returning to the Antitrust Division of the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT in 1985. In 1986 President RONALD REAGAN named him a judge of the U.S. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 98 GINNIE MAE Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. At this point in his career, Ginsburg seemed to be settling into a predictable future on the FEDERAL bench. But there was to be a short detour along the way. In 1987, to the surprise of almost ev eryone, Reagan nominated him to replace retiring Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. on the U.S. Supreme Court. Ginsburg’s nomination followed months of intense, sometimes acrimonious questioning by the SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE of Judge ROBERT H . BORK, Reagan’s first nominee. During these hearings, the Senate had departed from its traditional advice-and-consent role and closely questioned Bork on philosophical and doctri nal matters never before addressed in confirmation proceedings. Bork had a long paper trail, with years of scholarly writings that revealed him to be a strict, conservative constructionist on CONSTITUTIONAL matters, just the type of Justice Reagan wanted on the Court to carry his vision of judicial restr aint into the next century. However, members of the Senate, openly concerned with his conservative political ideol- ogies, eventually rejected Bork’s nomination. Stung by the Senate’s rejection of Bork, Reagan and his aides were determined to find a nominee who would fulfill their requirement of judicial restraint but who had no “history” that would make their choice vulnerable to attack. They thought they had just the person they needed in Ginsburg and, although Ginsburg had less than a year’s experience as a judge, Reagan nominated him for the vacancy. Ginsburg’s nomination ran into difficulty almost immediately. Senators raised the obvious issues of his youth and inexperience and voiced concern about how his scanty judicial record made him a tabula rasa on constitutional matters. A conflict- of-interest question was raised when newspapers reported that at the Justice Department he had handled a major case involving the cable TV industry while he held a $140,000 INVESTMENT in a Canadian cable TV company. Then, too, it began to look as if he might be opposed by some conservatives Douglas Ginsburg. MARK WILSON/ NEWSMAKERS/GETTY IMAGES Douglas Howard Ginsburg 1946– ▼▼ ▼▼ 1950 2000 1975 ◆ ◆◆ ◆ ◆◆ ◆ ◆ 1946 Born, Chicago, Ill. ❖ 1950–53 Korean War 1961–73 Vietnam War 1970 Graduated from Cornell University 1973 Earned J.D. from University of Chicago Law School 1973–74 Clerked for U.S. circuit judge Carl McGowan 1974–75 Clerked for Justice Thurgood Marshall 1975–83 Held professorship at Harvard Law School 1983–84 and 1985–86 Served as deputy assistant attorney general in DOJ 1988 Joined George Mason University School of Law as distinguished adjunct professor 1987 Nominated to U.S. Supreme Court by Reagan, withdrew his name 1986 Appointed to U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 1984–85 Served as administrator in the OMB 1999 Voted with majority in overturning EPA Clean Air Act health regulations, American Trucking Assn. v. EPA 2008 Resigned as chief judge; remained on court 2001 Named chief judge of U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 2002 Wrote majority opinion removing federal limits on commercial mass media ownership, Fox Television Stations v. FCC ◆ GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION GINSBURG, DOUGLAS HOWARD 99 because his wife, a physician, had reportedly performed some abortions. The death knell for Ginsburg’s nomination sounded when he admitted that he had sm oked marijuana “on a few occasions” while he was a student and during his early days on the faculty at Harvard. Faced with the embarrassment of backing a nominee who had admitted illicit drug use, the White House dispatched Secretary of Educa- tion William J. Bennett to urge Ginsburg to withdraw his name from consideration. Ginsburg complied, issuing a statement in which he said that the scrutiny of his personal life would continue to draw attention away from more relevant questions. “My views on the law and on what kind of Supreme Court justice I would make have been drowned out in the clamor,” he stated. He commended Reagan and hiswife,NancyReagan,for“leading the fight against illegal drugs,” adding, “Ifullysupport their effort and I hope that the young people of this country, including my own daughters, will learn from my mistake and heed their message.” The swift and unfortunate DEMISE of Ginsburg’s nomination was a sobering lesson for the Reagan administration. The president reacted by nominating an experienced and uncontroversial moderate, Judge ANTHONY M. KENNEDY, who was quickly and easily confirmed. Many feel that the Senate’s handling of the Bork and Ginsburg nominations set a precedent for later investigations of presidential appointees and established a breadth and depth of scrutiny that some say are outside the scope allowed by the Constitution. The Senate continued its method of scrutiny with CLARENCE THOMAS in 1991. After his withdrawal, Ginsburg returned to his position on the District of Columbia Circuit. In July 2001, after serving as an associate judge for nearly 15 years, he ascended to the position of chief judge, which he held until February 2008. As of 2009 he is still serving on the court as a judge, but David E. Sentelle has taken over as chief. Ginsburg has also maintained an active interest in LEGAL EDUCATION, serving as a part-time instructor at Harvard University, Columbia University, the University of Chicago, and GEORGE MASON University in Virginia. He teaches courses in antitrust, administrative law, and jurispru- dence. In addition, Ginsburg is the author of numerous legal casebooks and other texts, focusing primarily upon antitrust and economic regulation. Ginsburg is married to Hallee Perkins Morgan Ginsburg, and has three children. He is a member of the Illinois State BAR ASSOCIATION , the Massachusetts State Bar Associ- ation, the American Economic Association, and the Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi. Ginsburg is also an honorary member of the District of Columbia Bar Association. FURTHER READINGS Groner, Jonathan. 2001. “Edwards Passing the Torch.” Legal Times (June 11). Krauthammer, Charles. 1987. “The Ginsburg Test: Bad Logic.” Time (November 23). v GINSBURG, RUTH BADER RUTH BADER GINSBURG was appointed ASSOCIATE JUSTICE of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1993. Ginsburg was the first person nominated to the Court by President BILL CLINTON, filling the vacancy created by the retirement of Justice BYRON R. WHITE. As an ATTORNEY prior to her appointment, Ginsburg won distinction for her advocacy of women’s rights before the Supreme Court. Ginsburg was born March 15, 1933, in Brooklyn, daughter of Nathan Bader, a furr ier and haberdasher, and Celia (Amster) Bader. Ginsburg attended New York public schools and then Cornell University. She married Martin Ginsburg after graduating from Cornell in 1954, and gave birth to a daughter, Jane Ginsburg, before entering Harvard Law School in 1956. Ginsburg was an outstanding student and was elected president of her class at the prestigious Harvard Law School. After her second year, she transferred to Columbia Law School, following her husband, who had taken a position with a New York City law firm. Ginsburg was elected to the Columbia LAW REVIEW and graduated first in her class. She was admitted to the New York bar in 1959. Despite her academic brilliance, New York law firms refused to hire Ginsburg because she was a woman. She finally got a position as a law clerk to a FEDERAL district court judge. In 1961 Ginsburg entered the academic field as a research associate at Columbia Law School. In 1963, she joined the faculty of Rutgers Univer- sity School of Law, where she served as a professor until 1972. In 1972 Ginsburg’s career shifted to that of an advocate. As the director of the Women’s Rights Project of the AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION , she developed and used a strategy of IT IS A CARDINAL PRINCIPLE OF OUR SYSTEM OF CRIMINAL LAW THAT THE FACTS ARE SETTLED BY THE TRIER OF FACT , BE IT A JURY OR A JUDGE , AND ARE NOT ORDINARILY TO BE DETERMINED BY A REVIEWING COURT . —DOUGLAS GINSBURG GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 100 GINSBURG, RUTH BADER showing that laws that discriminated between men and women were often bas ed on stereo- types that were unfair to both sexes. In the early to mid-1970s, Ginsburg argued six women’s rights cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, winning five of them. FRONTIERO V. RICHARDSON, 411 U.S. 677, 93 S. Ct. 1764, 36 L. Ed. 2d 583 (1973), illustrates the type of cases Ginsburg argued before the Court. In Frontiero, a female Air Force officer success- fully challenged statutes (10 U.S.C.A. §§ 1072, 1076; 37 U.S.C.A. §§ 401, 403) that allowed a married serviceman to qualify for higher housing benefits even if his wife was not dependent on his income, while requiring a married servicewoman to prove her husband’s dependence before receiving the same benefit. The Supreme Court voted 8–1 to overturn the law. President JIMMY CARTER appointed Ginsburg to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Circuit in 1980. In this position Ginsburg proved to be a judicial moderate, despite her reputation as a women’s rights advocate. She supported a woman’s right to choose to have an ABORTION, but disagreed with the framework of ROE V. WADE, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147, the 1973 decision that gave women that right. She generally sided with the government in criminal cases, but supported CIVIL RIGHTS issues. She was a model of judicial restraint, preferring legislative solu- tions to social problems, instead of judge-made solutions. President Clinton nominated Ginsburg to the Supreme Court in 1993, and she was easily confirmed. Her tenure on the High Court has been consistent with her service on the court of appeals. She has remained a judicial moderate with a strong emphasis on protecting civil rights. In UNITED STATES V. VIRGINIA, 518 U.S. 515, 116 S. Ct. 2264, 135 L. Ed. 2d 735 (1996), Ginsburg wrote the majority opinion, which ordered the all-male Virginia Military INSTITUTE (VMI) to admit women or give up state Ruth Bader Ginsburg. STEVE PETTEWAY, COLLECTION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Ruth Bader Ginsburg 1933– ▼▼ ▼▼ 1930 2000 1975 1950 ◆ ❖ ◆◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ 2003 Wrote majority opinion upholding Congressional authority to extend copyright limits in Eldred v. Ashcroft 1980–93 Served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 1963–72 Held professorship at Rutgers University School of Law 1973 Argued Frontiero v. Richardson before U.S. Supreme Court 1954 Graduated from Cornell University 1959 Graduated first in class from Columbia Law School; admitted to N.Y. bar 1933 Born Ruth Bader, Brooklyn, N.Y. 1950–53 Korean War 1961–73 Vietnam War 1981 Sandra Day O'Connor became first woman appointed to U.S. Supreme Court 1993 Named associate justice of U.S. Supreme Court 1996 Wrote majority opinion in United States v. Virginia, which ordered VMI to admit women or give up state funding 2000 Presidential election result uncertain due to disputed Fla. vote count; recount halted by U.S. Supreme Court with 5–4 vote in Bush v. Gore 2009 Denied request to stay order releasing court documents in abuse case Rosado v. Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp. 2002 Wrote majority opinion in Ring v. Arizona; held only juries, not judges, can impose death penalties 2000 Wrote dissenting opinion in Bush v. Gore 1999 Wrote majority opinion in landmark Olmstead v. L.C. 1972–80 Served as director of ACLU's Women's Rights Project 1972 Became first woman to hold full tenured professorship at Columbia Law School ◆ GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION GINSBURG, RUTH BADER 101 funding. This decision also affected the Citadel, South Carolina’s state-run all-male military school, and was a decisive blow to state- sponsored SEX DISCRIMINATION. Ginsburg rejected a proposal by VMI that it establish a separate military program for women. Such a program would be unequal, Ginsburg concluded, because it would rely on stereotypes about women and would not provide an equal education. She stated, “Women seeking and fit for a VMI- quality education cannot be offered anything less under the state’s obligation to afford them genuinely equal protection.” Ginsburg has written for the majority in nearly 100 opinions. One of her most far- reaching opinions was the INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY case of New York Times v. Tasini, 533 U.S. 483, 121 L. Ed. 2d 2381, 150 L. Ed. 2d 500 (2001). The Tasini opinion upheld a 1999 federal appeals court decision, which found that the New York Times Company and its codefen- dants had violated the copyrights of Tasini and five other freelance writers by reproducing their work online on their own websites, and through subscription databases such as Lexis- Nexis. Ginsburg’s opinion states that publishing the same article in print and on electronic formats are separate publishing events for purposes of COPYRIGHT law. Consequently, the authors should be compensated for each publishing event. The suit was brought forward by freelance writers who complained that their work was posted on the INTERNET without their permission and, in some cases, earned extra revenue for publishers who sold access to the archived material. Ginsburg also has contributed nearly 40 dissenting opinions, including a strong DISSENT to the majority opinion in BUSH V. GORE, 531 U.S. 98, 121 S. Ct. 525, 148 L. Ed. 2d 388 (2000). The Bush opinion played a primary role in deter- mining the outcome of the 2000 elect ion in favor of GEORGE W. BUSH. Ginsburg’s dissent in the Bush case rested on the notion that “federal courts [should] defer to state high courts’ interpretations of their state’s own law.” Justice Ginsburg holds honorary degrees from a number of institutions, including American University, Hebrew Union College, Amherst College, and Georgetown University. She has also been an active BAR ASSOCIATION member, serving on the Board of Editors of the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION journal, and as secretary, board member, and executive com- mittee member of the American Bar Founda- tion. In addition, Ginsburg is a well-respected author and editor, writing on such topics as conflict of laws, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, and CIVIL PROCEDURE . In 2005 Ginsberg wrote the majority deci- sion in a 6–3 Supreme Court RULING that protects LEGAL AID for poor defendants that are convicted but want to APPEAL. In 1999, at the age of 66, Justice Ginsburg was diagnosed with colorectal cancer. She received radiation and chemotherapy treat- ments, and underwent surgery in September 1999. Upon recovery, she returned to her duties on the bench. On February 5, 2009, she underwent surgery related to pancreatic cancer. Ginsburg’s tumor was discovered at an early stage, and expert medical opinions have been optimistic about her recovery Since joining the Court, Ginsburg has supported gender equality, separation of church and state and workers rights, opposed property rights expansion, and moved to protec t workers against overzealous prosecutors more often than a majority of her colleagues. FURTHER READINGS Baugh, Joyce Ann, et al. 1994. “Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: A Preliminary Assessment.” University of Toledo Law Review 26 (fall). Biskupic, Joan. 1999. “A High Court of Recovery.” Washington Post (September 20). Campbell, Amy Leigh. 2004. Raising the Bar: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the ACLU Women’s Rights Project. Bloomington, IN: Xlibris Corporation. Kay, Herma Hill. 1999. “Equal Treatment: In the 1970s, Ruth Bader Ginsburg Sought to Do Something Radical: Level the Legal Playing Field for Men and Women.” American Lawyer 21 (December). Kushner, James A. 2003. “Introducing Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Predicting the Performance of a Ginsburg Court.” Southwestern University Law Review 32 (spring). O’Connor, Karen, and Barbara Palmer. 2001. “The Clinton Clones: Ginsburg, Breyer, and the Clinton Legacy.” Judicature 84 (March-April). GITLOW V. NEW YORK Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, 45 S. Ct. 625, 69 L. Ed. 1138, is a 1925 decision by the Supreme Court that upheld the constitutionality of criminal anarchy statutes. The DEFENDANT, Benjamin Gitlow, was a member of the Left Wing Section, a splinter group of the SOCIALIST PARTY. The group formed in opposition to the party’s DOMINANT policy of THE GREATEST FIGURES OF THE AMERICAN JUDICIARY HAVE BEEN INDEPENDENT THINKING INDIVIDUALS WITH OPEN BUT NOT EMPTY MINDS —INDIVIDUALS WILLING TO LISTEN AND LEARN . —RUTH BADER GINSBURG GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 102 GITLOW V. NEW YORK “moderate socialism,” and criticized the party for its insistence on introducing SOCIALISM through the legislative process. The Left Wing Section advocated change through militant and revolutionary means. It viewed mass industrial revolution as the mechanism by which the parliamentary state would be destroyed and replaced by a system of communist socialism. Gitlow was responsible for publishing and disseminating the group’s views. He did so in such pamphlets as the “The Left Wing Manifesto.” The manifesto was also published in The Revolutionary Age, the official paper of the Left Wing. The opinions expressed in these publications formed the bases for the defen- dant’s convictions under Sections 160 and 161 of the penal law of New York, which were the criminal anarchy statutes. Section 160 defined criminal anarchy and prescribed that the verbal or written advocacy of the doctrine be treated as a FELONY. Section 161 delineated the conduct that constituted the crime of advocacy of criminal anarchy and stated that its punishment be IMPRISONMENT,a fine, or both. The proscribed conduct consisted of the verbal or written advertisement or teaching of the duty, necessity, or propriety of overthrowing organized government by vio- lence, ASSASSINATION, or other unlawful acts. A person was also prohibited from publishing, editing, knowingly circulating, or publicly displaying any writing embodying this doctrine. There was a two-count INDICTMENT against Gitlow. The first charged that the defendant had advocated, advised, and taught the duty, neces- sity, and propriety of unlawfully overthrowing organized government through “The Left Wing Manifesto.” The second count charged that he had printed, published, knowingly circulated, and distributed The Revolutionary Age, contain- ing the writings set forth in the first count advocating the doctrine of criminal anarchy. In his APPEAL, Gitlow argued that Left Wing publications had resulted in no real action. Because they were merely utterances, he con- tended that the New York state laws violated the right of free speech protected by the FIRST AMENDMENT . In sustaining the defendant’s CON- VICTION , the U.S. Supreme Court assumed that the Due Process Clause of the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT prevented the states from impairing the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amend- ment. The Court also noted that the statutes did not penalize the “utterance or publication of ABSTRACT doctrine or academic theory having no propensity to INCITE concrete action. ” It found that Gitlow’s publications used language advo- cating, advising, or teaching the overthrow of organized government by unlawful means, and that such language IMPLIED an urging to action. The Court reasoned that revolutionary actions called for in Gitlow’s publications, including mass industrial uprisings and political mass strikes, implied the use of force and violence. Such actions are inhere ntly unlawful in a democratic system of government. It ruled that freedom of expression does not grant an individual the ABSOLUTE right to speak or publish, nor does it offer unqualified IMMUNITY from punishment for every possible utterance or publication. The state, in the exercise of its police power, is allowed to punish anyone who abuses the FREEDOM OF SPEECH and press by utterances that are adverse to the public WELFARE, tend to corrupt public morals, incite to crime, or breach the public peace. As part of its primary and essential right of self-preserva- tion, a state can penalize any expression that imperils the foundations of organized govern- ment and threatens its overthrow by unlawful means. The Court cautioned, however, that enforcement of state statutes cannot be arbitrary or unreasonable. In subsequent cases (for example, Branden- burg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 89 S. Ct. 1827, 23 L. Ed. 2d 430 [1969]; Hess v. Indiana, 414 U.S. 105, 94 S. Ct. 326, 30 L. Ed. 2d 303 [ 1973]), the Court rejected the “dangerous tendency” doc- trine it formulated in Gitlow, that incitement to action is implicit in utterances that advocate unlawful acts. The Court subsequently held that states may only prohibit utterances that directly incite lawless action or advocate individuals to imminently take lawless action. FURTHER READINGS Levinson, Nan. 2006. Outspoken: Free Speech Stories. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press. The Oyez Project Web site. Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925). Available online at http://www.oyez.org/cases/ 1901-1939/1922/1922_19; website home page: http:// www.oyez.org (accessed September 4, 2009). Tedford, Thomas L., and Dale A. Herbeck. 2009. Freedom of Speech in the United States. State College, PA: Strata. CROSS REFERENCES Anarchism; Communism; Due Process of Law; Incorpo- ration Doctrine. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION GITLOW V. NEW YORK 103 v GLANVILL, RANULF English COMMON LAW developed partly in response to the pioneering work of RANULF GLANVILL . As chief justiciar, Glanvill was the legal and financial minister of England under Henry II. He is commonly associated with the first important treatise on practice and procedure in the king’s courts: Tractatus de legibus et consuetudinibus regni Angliae (Treatise on the laws and customs of the realm of England). Historians agree that Glanvill is probably not the author of the Tractatus, which first appeared circa 1188, but he is thought to have been instrumental in its creation. Early U.S. law owes much to ENGLISH LAW, which became greatly simplified and available to common people during Glanvill’s tenure. Glanvill was probably born at Stratford St. Andrew, near Saxmundham, Suffolk, Eng- land. Although few details are known about his life, it is recorded that he had bumpy political fortunes. He was sheriff of Yorkshire from 1163 to 1170, but lost his authority following an official inquiry into the corruption of sheriffs. He regained it by helping raise troops against Scottish invaders in 1173–74, and his reward from King Henry II was a series of increasingly important appointments: justice of the king’s court, itinerant justice in the northern circuit, and ambassador to the court in Flanders. In 1180, Glanvill’s ascent to power seemed com- plete when he became legal and financial minister, but a new king, Richard I, threw him in prison. He ransomed his way out, and then died of illness on a Crusade at Acre, in what is now Israel, in 1190. For a few centuries before Glanvill became influential, English law was mired in FEUDALISM. Under this political and military system, justice was administered in crude forms: trial by combat, which operated under the assumption that God would favor the righteous party, and trial by ordeal, which, in one of its forms, posed the question of innocence as a test of whether a person’s wounds could heal within three days. By the twelfth century, feudalistic law was dying. The local courts still adhered to its methods, but the king’s courts offered a super- ior form of justice that was at once less bloody and less superstitious. This was a writ-based, or formulary, system. It allowed litigants to frame a complaint in terms of a particular action, which had its own WRIT and established modes of PLEADING and trial. Although primitive by modern standards, the formulary system repre- sented a conside rable advance for its time. But such justice was chiefly available to great lords; commoners had to resort to the local courts. As chief justiciar, Glanvill sought to extend the benefits of the king’s courts to ordinary people. He accomplished this through a system of itinerant royal justices, and the results revolutionized English legal procedure. As the feudal forms fell into disuse, they were replaced with a dominant system of central courts that followed uniform procedure throughout the realm and made English law simpler and better. The Tractatus played a crucial role in this improvement. In fourteen books, it covered each of the eighty distinct writs used in the king’s courts. One important writ, for example, was the grand ASSIZE, a procedure for settling land disputes that replaced the feudal practice of battle with a form of jury system. The treatise offered this commentary on its value: “It takes account so effectively of both human life and civil condition that all men may preserve the rights which they have in any free tenement, while avoiding the doubtful outcome of battle. In this way, too, they may avoid the greatest of Ranulf Glanvill c.1130–1190 ▼▼ ▼▼ 11251125 12001200 11751175 11501150 ❖ ❖ c.1130 Born, Stratford St. Andrew, Suffolk, England 1154–89 Reign of King Henry II 1189–99 Reign of Richard I 1135–54 Reign of King Stephen 1163–70 and 1173–74 Served as sheriff of Yorkshire ◆ 1180 Appointed chief justiciar of England ◆ ◆ 1188 Tractatus first appeared 1190 Died, on Crusade, at Acre in what is now Israel 1189 Richard I threw Glanvill in prison; he ransomed his way out and went on Crusade THE LEGAL CONSTITUTION IS BASED ABOVE ALL ON EQUITY ; AND JUSTICE , WHICH IS SELDOM ARRIVED AT BY BATTLE , IS MORE EASILY AND QUICKLY ATTAINED THROUGH ITS USE . —RANULF GLANVILL GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 104 GLANVILL, RANULF all punishments, unexpected and untimely death.” As with other writs, the Tractatus painstakingly spelled out how the grand assize worked. Directed at practitioners of law, the Tractatus sought to encourage them to adop t these new “royal benefit[s] granted to the people by the goodness of the king.” The simplicity and clarity of the Tractatus helped lead England to a common law. Although records from the period associate Glanvill with the treatise, scholars believe he is unlikely to have written it. The real author may have be en his nephew, Hubert Walter, who was the archbishop of Canterbury, or even a later justiciar, Geoffrey Fitzpeter. However, its au- thorship is of secondary importance to its effect. Besides encouraging the spread of unified procedure, it provided the foundation for later classics, in particular Henry de Bracton’s thirteenth-century treatise on English law and custom, De legibus et consuetudinibus Angliae. FURTHER READINGS Beames, John. 1900. A Translation of Glanville. Washington, D.C.: John Byrne. de Glanvill, Ranulf. 1996. Tractatus de legibus et consuetu- dinibus regni Angliae. English translation available at http://www.vi.uh.edu/pages/bob/elhone/glanvill.html; web site home page: http://www.vi.uh.edu (accessed on July 26, 2009). Scrutton, Thomas Edward. 1885. The Influence of the Roman Law on the Law of England. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press. GLASS-STEAGALL ACT The Glass-Steagall Act, also known as the Banking Act of 1933 (48 Stat. 162), was passed by Congress in 1933 and prohibits commercial banks from engaging in the investment business. It was enacted as an emergency response to the failure of nearly 5,000 banks during the Great Depression. The act was originally part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s NEW DEAL program and became a permanent measure in 1945. It gave tighter regulation of national banks to the Federal Reserve System; prohibited bank sales of SECURITIES; and created the FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC), which insures bank deposits with a pool of money appropriated from banks. Beginning in the 1900s, commercial banks established security affiliates that floated bond issues and underwrote corporate stock issues. (In underwriting, a bank guarantees to furnish a definite sum of money by a definite date to a business or government entity in retur n for an issue of bonds or stock.) The expansion of commercial banks into securities underwriting was substantial until the 1929 STOCK MARKET crash and the subsequent Depression. In 1930 the BANK OF THE UNITED STATES failed, reportedly because of activities of its security affiliates that created artificial conditions in the market. In 1933 all of the banks throughout the country were closed for a four-day period, and 4,000 banks closed permanently. As a result of the bank closings and the already devastated economy, public confidence in the U.S. financial structure was low. In order to restore the banking public’sconfidencethat banks would follow reasonable banking prac- tices, Congress created the Glass-Steagall Act. The act forced a separation of commercial and investment banks by preventing commercial banks from underwriting securities, with the exception of U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities, and municipal and state general- obligation securities. More specifically, the act authorizes Fede ral Re serve banks to use government obligations and COMMERCIAL PAPER as collateral for their n ote issues, in order to encourage expansion of the currency. Banks also may offer advisory services regarding investments for their customers, as well as buy and sell securities for their customers. However, information gained from providing such services may not be used by a bank when it acts as a lender. Likewise, investment banks may n ot engage in the business of rece iving deposits. A group of congressmen look on as President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs the Glass-Steagall Act on June 16, 1933. Senators Carter Glass (light suit) and Henry S. Steagall stand on either side of the president. BETTMANN/CORBIS. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION GLASS-STEAGALL ACT 105 A bank is defined as an institution organized under the laws of the United States, any state of the United States, the District of Columbia, any territory of the United States, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, or the Virgin Islands, that both accepts demand deposits (deposits that the depositor may withdraw by check or similar means for payment to third parties or others) and is engaged in the business of making commercial loans (12 U.S.C.A. § 1841 (c)(1) [1988]). Investment banking consists mostly of securities underwriting and related activities; making a market in securities; and setting up co rporate mergers, acquisitions, and restructuring. Investment banking also includes services provided by brokers or dealers in transactions in the secondary market. A sec- ondary market is one where securities are bought and sold subsequent to their original issuance. Despite attempts to reform Glass-Steagall, the legislature has not passed any major changes—although it has passed bills that relax restrictions. Banks may now set up brokerage subsidiaries, and UNDERWRITE a limited number of issues such as asset-backed securities, corpo- rate bonds, and commercial paper. The Glass-Steaga ll Act restored public confidence in banking practices during the Great Depression. However, many historians believe that the commercial bank securities practices of the time had little actual effect on the already devastated economy and were not a major contributor to the Depression. Some legislators and bank reformers argued that the act was never nece ssary, or that it had become outdated and should be repealed. Congress responded to these criticisms in passing the Gramm-Leach-Bilely Act of 1999, which ma de s ignif icant changes to Glass- Steagall. The 1999 law did not make sweeping changes in the types o f business that may be conducted b y an individual bank, broker- dealer or insurance company. Instead, the act repealed the Glass-Steagall Act’srestric- tions on bank and securities-firm affiliations. It also amended the Bank HOLDING COMPANY Act to permit affiliations among financial services companies, including banks, securi- ties firms and insurance companies. The new law sought financial modernization by re- moving the very barriers that Glass-Steagall had erected. FURTHER READINGS Cintron, Ivan. 1995. “Bankers Hope Reform Helps Shatter Glass.” Nashville Business Journal (September 4). Class, Edgar. 1995. “The Precarious Position of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation after O’Melveny and Myers v. FDIC.” Administrative Law Journal of the American Univ. (summer). Eaton, David M. 1995. “The Commercial Banking-related Activities of Investment Banks and Other Nonbanks.” Emory Law Journal 44 (summer). Feibelman, Adam. 1996. “The Dukes of Moral Hazard.” Memphis Business Journal (July 1). Smoot, James R. 1996. “Financial Institutions Reform in the Wake of Valic.” Creighton Law Review (February). Sullivan, Edward D. 1995. “Glass-Steagall Update: Proposals to Modernize the Structure of the Financial Services Industry.” Banking Law Journal 112 (November– December). “U.S. Bank Law Overhaul Not Provoking Big Changes— Meyer.” 2001. Reuters Business Report (February 15). Woelful, Charles J. 1994. Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance. 10th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. CROSS REFERENCES Banks and Banking; Federal Reserve Board; Glass, Carter. v GLASS, CARTER Carter Glass sponsored important banking laws of the twentieth century, among them the Glass- Steagall Acts of 1932 and 1933 (48 Stat. 162). He wrote and sponsored the legislation that established the Federal Reserve System in 1913. He was also a key player in making amendments to the system during the decades following its establishment. A Virginia Democrat, he served as secretary of the treasury under Woodrow Wilson and was a member of the House of Representa- tives and the Senate. Glass was born January 4, 1858, in Lynch- burg, Virginia, the youngest of twelve children. His mother, Augusta Christian Glass, died when he was two years old, and Glass was raised by a sister ten years older than he. His father, Robert H. Glass, was the editor of the Daily Republic. Following the Civil War, Glass’s father turned down an offer of reappointment to his old position as postmaster general, because he did not want to be on the payroll of the nation he had just fought. Having lived through a financially strapped childhood during the Re- construction period, Glass would as an adult consistently oppose strong centralized control by the federal government except in emergencies. Glass left school at age 14 to begin a printer’s apprenticeship at his father’s paper. He com- pleted his apprenticeship in 1876 when the GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 106 GLASS, CARTER family moved to Petersburg, Virginia. Glass soon moved back to Lynchburg to work as an a uditor for t he railroad. In 1880 he became the city editor, and then the editor, of t he Lynchburg N ews. With savings and the financial backing of friends, he purchased that newspaper in 1888. The same year he married Aurelia McDearmon Caldwell, a teacher. In the early 1 890s Glass bought an d consolidated othe r Lynchburg newspapers. In 1899 Glass was elected to the Virginia state senate, where he was put on the committee of finance and banking. During his career as a state legislator, he was an active debater on suffrage for African Americans, the subject of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. He supported restricting voting rights for illiterate former slaves on the theory that these votes were used by those in power to maintain their power. He also argued in defense of the EIGHTEENTH AMENDMENT, prohibiting the sale of alcohol. In 1933, however, he voted for its appeal on the grounds that it w as futile to maintain a law that could not be enforced. In 1902 Glass was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, where he served until 1918. In 1904 he was appointed to the Banking and Currency Committee. He devoted the next several years to studying the topic of banking, and introduced few bills during this period. The U.S. banking system of the late nine- teenth and early twentieth centuries was unstable, leading to a series of banking panics over a 34- year span. By the end of the nineteenth century, banks were largely independent from, and often in competition with, one another. The relatively young U.S. banking system was burdened primarily with a lack of flexibility in lending (or rediscounting) policies and currency availability, as well as weak supervision and inadequate check collection systems. In the first decade of the twentieth century, Glass began crafting a bill to address the need for banking reform. In 1912 WOODROW WILSON was elected PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Glass, now chair of the House Banking Com- mittee, enlisted and got Wilson ’ssupportfor his reform bill. The Federal Reserve Act, 12 U.S.C.A. § 221 et seq., the most radical banking reform bill in U.S. history, was passed into law December 23, 1913. In presenting his bill to the House, Glass said in his closing remarks, “I have tried to reconcile conflicting views, to compose all friction and technical knowledge of the banker, the wisdom of the philosopher, and the rights of the people.” According to its preamble, Glass’sbillwas created to “provide for the establishment of Carter Glass. AP IMAGES ▼▼ ▼▼ Carter Glass 1858–1946 18501850 19001900 19251925 19501950 18751875 ❖ 1858 Born, Lynchburg, Va. 1861–65 U.S. Civil War ◆ 1872 Left school to apprentice at father's newspaper ◆ 1880 Became city editor of the Lynchburg News ◆ 1888 Bought the Lynchburg News ◆ 1899 Elected to Va. state senate 1904 Appointed to House Banking and Currency Committee 1913 Federal Reserve Act passed 1914–18 World War I ◆ ◆ 1902–18 Served in U.S. House 1918–20 Served as U.S. secretary of the treasury ◆ 1927 Adventures in Constructive Finance published 1939–45 World War II ❖ 1946 Died, Washington, D.C. 1932–33 Glass-Steagall Acts liberalized borrowing terms for Federal Reserve member banks and established FDIC 1920–46 Served in U.S. Senate GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION GLASS, CARTER 107 . 1 858 –1946 1 850 1 850 19001900 19 251 9 25 1 950 1 950 18 751 8 75 ❖ 1 858 Born, Lynchburg, Va. 1861– 65 U.S. Civil War ◆ 1872 Left school to apprentice at father's newspaper ◆ 1880 Became city editor of the Lynchburg News ◆ 1888 Bought the. Antitrust Division of the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT in 19 85. In 1986 President RONALD REAGAN named him a judge of the U.S. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 98 GINNIE MAE Court of Appeals for. Served as director of ACLU's Women's Rights Project 1972 Became first woman to hold full tenured professorship at Columbia Law School ◆ GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION GINSBURG,