Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 7 P29 pot

The increased number of these representatives has led states to develop training and certifica- tion programs for individuals wishing to serve as next friends or guardians ad litem. Though attorneys also may represent juveniles, next friends provide valuable assistance to the courts. CROSS REFE RENCE Infants. NEXT OF KIN The person or persons most closely related——— by blood or “affinity”——— to someone who dies. When someone dies without leaving a will (or without leaving a valid will), the next of kin is that person, or those people, legally entitled to inherit the decedent’s property. The term is variously interpreted to include blood relatives or relations by marriage or even adoptive parents or children. Commonly, police will first notify a deceased person’s next of kin of a death, and generally prior to release of the person’s identity to the media, as a privacy safeguard. Illinois, for example, has a statute known as the Wrongful Death Act, 740 ILCS 180/0.01, which provides for the recovery of funds for “the exclusive benefit of the surviving spouse and next of kin” of a deceased person. The term is not limited to matters of death and survivorship. For example , when a person is incapacitated and unable to form his or her own medical decisions, an individua l designated as next of kin may be authorized to act on behalf of that person. CROSS REFE RENCE Descent and Distribution. NIHIL [Latin, Nothing.] The abbreviated designation of a statement filed by a sheriff or constable with a court describing his or her unsuccessful attempts to serve a writ, notice, or process upon the designated person. The complete phrase, nihil est, refers to a failure to serve any writ. The English word nil, meaning “nothing,” is a contracted form of nihil, which serves as the root of the words “annihi- late” and “ni hilist.” v NIMMER, MELVILLE BERNARD Melville B. Nimmer was a leading authority on COPYRIGHT law. Nimmer was born June 6, 1923. He graduated from the University of California at Berkeley in 1947 and from Harvard Law School in 1950. After law school he obtained a position in the legal department at Paramount Pictures where he remained until 1957 when he entered private practice. Nimmer continued to be involved with the motion picture industry, however, and served as general counsel to the Writers Guild of America, which represents film and television writers. He was the chief negotiator for the guild during a five-month strike in 1960 where the right to receive residuals for the showing of theatrical films on television was established. Although Nimmer’s work in the film indus- try involved questions of copyright law, he had to learn the subject largely by reading cases on his own. At that time copyright law was a relatively unimportant discipline. Few lawyers specialized in it, and no law school offered courses in the subject as part of its regular curriculum. In the last decades, however, copyright questions have Melville Bernard Nimmer 1923–1989 ▼▼ ▼▼ 19251925 20002000 19751975 19501950 ❖ ◆◆◆ ❖ ◆ ◆ ◆ 1939–45 World War II 1923 Born, Los Angeles, Calif. 1950–53 Korean War 1961–73 Vietnam War 1942–46 Served in U.S. Army 1947 Earned A. B. from University of California at Berkeley 1950 Earned LL.B. from Harvard Law School ◆ 1960 Served as chief negotiator for the Writers Guild of America during strike 1950–57 Worked in the legal department at Paramount Pictures 1962 Became professor of law at UCLA Law School 1963 Nimmer on Copyright published 1971 Successfully represented anti- draft protester in Cohen v. California 1984 Nimmer on Freedom of Speech published 1989 Died, Los Angeles, Calif. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 268 NEXT OF KIN become a major concern for many industries, including the computer industry. Nimmer became a leading authority in the growing field. His treatise Nimmer on Copy- right (first published in 1963 with frequent revisions thereafter) became the standard work on the subject. A companion volume Nimmer on Freedom of Speech appeared in 1984. When he died, Nimmer was working on a book entitled World Copyright, which was to contain chapters on all significant copyright laws in the world. In 1962 Nimmer joined the faculty at the University of California at Los Angeles School of Law and continued to teach there until his death. At the university Nimmer came into contact with the student protests and antiwar demonstrations and became increasingly inter- ested in the FREEDOM OF SPEECH issues that the demonstrations raised. In Cohen v. Cali f ornia, 403 U.S. 15, 91 S. Ct. 1780, 29 L. Ed. 2d 284 (1971), Nimmer represented a protestor who was charged with disturbing the peace because he entered a courthouse wearing a jacket inscribed with a vulgar protest against the draft. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the protester on the ground that the words presented no danger of violence and that the state therefore had no compelling reason to suppress them. Nimmer died November 23, 1985, in Los Angeles, California. FURTHER READINGS Low, Charlotte. “Profile.” Los Angeles Daily Journal (April 19, 1982). McCarthy, J. Thomas. 1987. “Melville B. Nimmer and the Right of Publicity.” Melville B. Nimmer Symposium. UCLA Law Review 34 (June-August). Van Alstyne, William W. 1996. “Remembering Melville Nimmer: Some Cautionary Notes on Commercial Speech.” UCLA Law Review 43 (June). NINETEENTH AMENDMENT The Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. The Nineteenth Amendment was enacted in 1920, after a 70-ye ar struggle led by the women’s suffrage movement. The groundwork for the suffrage movement was laid in 1848 in Seneca Falls, New York, now considered the birthplace of the women’s movement. There, ELIZABETH CADY STANTON drafted the Declaration of Rights and Senti- ments, which demanded voting rights, property rights, educational opportunities, and economic equity for women. Rather than face the difficult task of obtaining approval of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution from an all-male Congress preoccupied with the question of SLAVERY,the suffragists decided to focus their attention on the separate states and seek state constitutional amendments. The state-by-state effort began in 1867 in Kansas with a REFERENDUM to enfran- chise women. The referendum was defeated, but that same year the western territories of Wyoming and Utah provided the first victories for the suffragists. The movement then suffered a series of setbacks beginning in January 1878, when the voting rights amendment was first introduced in Congress. The full SENATE did not consider the amendment until 1887 and voted to defeat the bill. The suffragists continued their state-by- state strategy and won a referendum ballot in Colorado in 1893 and in Idaho in 1896. The suffragists mounted a final and decisive drive in the second decade of the 1900s with victories in Washington in 1910 and in California in 1911. The following year, Arizona, Kansas, and Oregon gave women the right to vote, and in 1913 Illinois also passed measures Suffragists march in a 1912 rally in New York City. In 1920, after decades of struggle for the right to vote, the Nineteenth Amendment’s ratification granted female suffrage. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION NINETEENTH AMENDMENT 269 Table shows maximum number of women elected or appointed to serve in that Congress at one time. (A total of t hree women served in the 75th Congress, but no more than two served together at any one time.) Numbers do not include those who filled expired terms and those never sworn in. Numbers do not include the delegate from pre-statehood Hawaii or nonvoting delegates from U.S. territories and Washington, D.C. ILLUSTRATION BY GGS CREATIVE RESOURCES. REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF GALE, A PART OF CENGAGE LEARNING. Women in U.S. Congress: 1917 to 2011 Number of women 105th Congress, 1997–99 104th Congress, 1995–97 103rd Congress, 1993–95 102nd Congress, 1991–93 101st Congress, 1989–91 100th Congress, 1987–89 99th Congress, 1985–87 98th Congress, 1983–85 97th Congress, 1981–83 96th Congress, 1979–81 95th Congress, 1977–79 94th Congress, 1975–77 93rd Congress, 1973–75 92nd Congress, 1971–73 91st Congress, 1969–71 90th Congress, 1967–69 89th Congress, 1965–67 88th Congress, 1963–65 87th Congress, 1961–63 86th Congress, 1959–61 85th Congress, 1957–59 84th Congress, 1955–57 83rd Congress, 1953–55 82nd Congress, 1951–53 81st Congress, 1949–51 80th Congress, 1947–49 79th Congress, 1945–47 78th Congress, 1943–45 77th Congress, 1941–43 76th Congress, 1939–41 75th Congress, 1937–39 74th Congress, 1935–37 73rd Congress, 1933–35 72nd Congress, 1931–33 71st Congress, 1929–31 70th Congress, 1927–29 69th Congress, 1925–27 68th Congress, 1923–25 67th Congress, 1921–23 66th Congress, 1919–21 65th Congress, 1917–19 108th Congress, 2003–05 109th Congress, 2005–07 110th Congress, 2007–09 111th Congress, 2009–11 106th Congress, 1999–2001 107th Congress, 2001–03 Women in Senate Women in House SOURCE: Center for the American Woman and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, and Open CRS, Con g ressional Research Re p orts for the Peo p le. 0 1020304050607080 GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 270 NINETEENTH AMENDMENT supporting suffrage, as did Montana and Nevada in 1914. Women in eleven states voted in the 1916 presidential election. By that time, the United States was also involved in WORLD WAR I , which brought national attention to the suffrage movement as well as to the important role that women played in the war effort. During the war, an unprecedented number of women joined the depleted industrial and public service workforce. Women became an active and visible population of the labor sector that benefited the national economy. By the end of 1918, four more states—Michigan, Oklahoma, New York, and South Dakota—had approved women’s suffrage. With the requisite two-thirds majority, the U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES introduced the amendment in January 1918, and President Woodrow Wilson promptly announced his support. Though the House narrowly passed the amendment, the Senate defeated it in October by three votes just prior to the congressional elections. In response, the Na- tional Woman’s Party urged voters to defeat anti-suffrage senators who were up for election. After the 1918 election, most members of Congress supported suffrage. The amendment passed the House in May 1919 and in the Senate in June. The amendment was ratified in August 1920, when Tennessee became the thirty-sixth state to approve it. The SUPREME COURT,inLeser v. Garnett, 258 U.S. 130, 42 S.Ct. 217, 66 L.Ed. 505 (1922), upheld the constitutionality of the Nineteenth Amendment. FURTHER READINGS Brown, Jennifer K. 1993. “The Nineteenth Amendment and Women’s Equality.” Yale Law Journal 102 (June). Clift, Eleanor. 2003. Founding Sisters and the Nineteenth Amendment. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons. Hillyard, Carrie. 1996. “The History of Suffrage and Equal Rights Provisions in State Constitutions.” BYU Journal of Public Law 10 (winter). CROSS REFERENCES Anthony, Susan Brownell; Equal Rights Amendment; Women’s Rights. NINETY-DAY LETTER The name given to a written notice sent to a taxpayer by the Internal Revenue Service regard- ing a deficiency in the payment of tax (26 U.S.C.A. § 6212 et seq.). The ninety-day letter, also known as the “statutory notice of deficiency,” suspends the running of the STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS regarding tax assessment for 90 days. During the ninety days following the mailing of a ninety-day letter, the taxpayer may consent to the assessment and pay the tax but later seek a refund in U.S. district court. If the taxpayer disputes the assessment or refuses to pay the additional amount, he or she may challenge the deficiency by filing a petition with the U.S. TAX COURT. The ninety-day letter, sent by certified or registered mail, gives the taxpayer an opportunity to challenge an alleged deficiency before paying it. If the taxpayer neither pays the tax nor files a Tax Court petition within the ninety-day period, the additional tax liability may be assessed promptly. For taxpayers who reside outside the United States, the time period is extended to 150 days. The petition is considered timely if the postmark date falls within the prescrib ed 90 days and the envelope containing the petition is property addressed with the correct postage. The U.S. Tax Court has a simplified procedure for cases where the amount in dispute is $50,000 or less for any one tax year. The time a taxpayer has for filing a petition is set by law and cannot be extended or suspended. Plaintiffs may represent themselves before the Tax Court, or they may hire a lawyer to do so. CROSS REFERENCE Taxation. NINTH AMENDMENT The Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. The Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Consti- tution is something of an enigma. It provides that the naming of certain rights in the Constitution does not take away from the people rights that are not named. Yet neither the la nguage nor the history of the Ninth Amendment offers any hints as to the nature of the rights it was designed to protect. Every year federal courts are asked to recognize new UNENUMERATED RIGHTS “retained by the people,” and typically they turn to the Ninth Amendment. However, the federal GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NINTH AMENDMENT 271 judiciary does not base rulings exclusively on the Ninth Amendment; the courts usually cite the amendment as a secondary source of fundamental liberties. In particular, the Ninth Amendment has played a significant role in establishing a constitutional right to privacy. Ratified in 1791, the Ninth Amendment is an outgrowth of a disagreement between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists ove r the importance of attaching a BILL OF RIGHTS to the Constitution. When the Constitution was initially drafted by the Framers in 1787, it contained NO BILL of Rights. The Anti-Federalists, who generally opposed RATIFICATION because they believed that the Constitution conferred too much power on the federal government, supported a Bill of Rights to serve as an additional constraint against despotism. The Federalists, by contrast, supported ratification of the Con- stitution without a Bill of Rights because they believed that any enumeration of fundamental liberties was unnecessary and dangerous. The Federalists contended that a Bill of Rights was unnecessary because in their view the federa l government possessed only limited powers that were expressly delegated to it by the Constitution. They believed that all powers not constitutionally delegated to the federal govern- ment were inherently reserved to the people and the states. Nowhere in the Constitution, the Federalists pointed out, is the federal govern- ment given the power to trample on individual liberties. The Federalists feare d that if the Constitution were to include a Bill of Rights that protected certain liberties from government encroachment, an inference would be drawn that the federal government could exercise an implied power to regulate such libertie s. ALEXANDER HAMILTON, one of the leading Federalists, articulated this concern in The Federalist, No. 84. Why should a Bill of Rights, Hamilton asked, “declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?” For instance, Hamilton said it was unnecessary for a Bill of Rights to protect the FREEDOM OF THE PRESS when the federal government is not granted the power to regulate the press. A provision “against restraining the liberty of the press,” Hamilton said, “afford[s] the clear implication that a power to prescribe proper regulations concern- ing it was intended to be vested in the national government.” The Federalists were also concerned that any constitutional enumeration of liberties might imply that other rights, not enumerated by the Constitution, would be surrendered to the government. A Bill of Rights, they feared, would quickly become the exclusive means by which the American people could secure their freedom and stave off tyranny. Federalist JAMES MADISON argued that any attempt to enumerate funda- mental liberties would be incomplete and might imperil other freedoms not listed. A “positive declaration of some essential rights could not be obtained in the requisite latitude,” Madison said. “If an enumeration be made of all our rights,” he queried, “will it not be implied that everything omitted is given to the general government?” Anti-Federalists and others who supported a Bill of Rights attempted to mollify the Feder- alists’ concerns with three counterarguments. First, the Anti-Federalists underscored the fact that the Constitution guarantees certain liberties even without a Bill of Rights. For example, Article I of the Constitution prohibits Congress from suspending the writ of HABEAS CORPUS and from passing bills of ATTAINDER and EX POST FACTO LAWS . If thes e liberties could be enumerated without endangering other unenumerated lib- erties, Anti-Federalists reasoned, additional liberties, such as freedom of the press and religion, could be safeguarded in a Bill of Rights. Second, while acknowledging that it would be impossible to enumerate every human liberty imaginable, supporters of a Bill of Rights maintained that this obstacle should not impede the Framers from establishing constitutional protection for certain essential liberties. THOMAS JEFFERSON , responding to Madison’s claim that no Bill of Rights could ever be exhaustive, commented that “[h]alf a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all of our rights, let us secure what we can.” Third, Anti-Federalists argued that if there was a genuine risk that naming certain liberties would imperil others, then an additional CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT should be drafted to offer protection for all liberties not men- tioned in the Bill of Righ ts. Such an amend- ment, the Anti-Federalists argued, would protect those liberties that might be omitted from the written constitutional provisions. This idea became the Ninth Amendment. Unlike every other provision contained in the Bill of Rights, the Ninth Amendment had no GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 272 NINTH AMENDMENT predecessor in ENGLISH LAW. It stemmed solely from the genius of those who framed and ratified the Constitution. Ironically, Madison, who opposed a Bill of Rights in 1787, was the chief architect of the Ninth Amendment during the First Congress in 1789. After reconsidering the arguments against a Bill of Rights, Madison said he was now convinced that such concerns could be over- come. It was still plausible, Madison believed, that the enumeration of particular rights might disparage other rights that were not enumer- ated. Yet Madison told Congress that he had attempted to guard against this danger by drafting the Ninth Amendment, which he submitted in the fo llowing form: The exceptions [to power] here or elsewhere in the constitution made in favor of particu- lar rights, shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people, or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the constitution; but either as actual limitations on such powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution. The House Select Committee, consisting of one representative from each state in the Union, reviewed and revised Madison’s proposal until it gradually evolved into its present form. The debates in both houses of Congress add little to the original understanding of the Ninth Amendment. The SENATE conducted its sessions in secret, and the House debates failed to offer a glimmer as to what unenumerated rights are protected by the Ninth Amendment, how such rights might be identified, or by what branch of government they should be enforced. The SUPREME COURT did not attempt to answer these questions for more than 170 years. Until 1965 no Supreme Court decision made more than a passing reference to the Ninth Amendment. In 1958 Supreme Court Justice ROBERT H. JACKSON wrote that the rights protected by the Ninth Amendment “are still a mystery.” Nevertheless, the dormant Ninth Amendment experienced a renaissance in Griswold v. Con- necticut, 381 U.S. 479, 85 S. Ct. 1678, 14 L. Ed. 2d 510 (1965). In Griswold, the Supreme Court was asked to review the constitutionality of a Connecticut law that banned adult residents from using BIRTH CONTROL and prohibited anyone from assisting others in violating this law. In the majority opinion, Justice WILLIAM O. DOUGLAS, writing for the Court, rejected the notion that the judiciary is obligated to enforce only those rights that are expressly enumerated in the Constitution. On several occasions in the past, Douglas wrote, the Court has recognized rights that cannot be found in the written language of the Constitution. Only briefly discussed in Douglas’s majority opinion, the Ninth Amendment was the centerpiece of Justice Arthur Goldberg’s con- curring opinion. The language and history of the Ninth Amendment, Goldberg wrote, dem- onstrate that the Framers of the Constitution intended the judiciary to protect certain un- written liberties with the same zeal that courts must protect those liberties expressly identified in the Bill of Rights. The Ninth Amendment, Goldberg emphasized, reflects the Framers’ original understanding that “other fundamental personal rights should not be denied protection simply because they are not specifically listed” in the Constitution. Justices Hugo L. Black and POTTER STEWART criticized the Court for invoking the Ninth Amendment as a basis for its decision in Griswold. The Ninth Amendment, the dissent- ing justices said, does not explain what unenumerated rights are retained by the people or how these rights should be identified. Nor does the amendment authorize the Supreme Court, in contrast to the president or Congress, to enforc e these rights. By reading the Ninth Amendment as creating a general right to privacy, Black and Stewart suggested, the unelected justices of the Supreme Court had substituted their own subjective notions of justice, liberty, and reasonableness for the wisdom and experience of the elected repre- sentatives in the Connecticut state legislature who were responsible for passing the birth control regulation. The Griswold decision was the starting point of a continuing debate over the proper role of the Ninth Amendment in constitutional JURIS- PRUDENCE . One side of the debate reads the Ninth Amendment to mean that the Constitu- tion protects not only those liberties written into the Bill of Rights but some additional liberties found outside the express language of any one provision. The other side sees no way to identify the unenumerated rights protected by the Ninth Amendment and no objective method by which to interpret and apply such rights. Under this view, courts that interpret GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NINTH AMENDMENT 273 and apply the Ninth Amendment do so in a manner that reflects the political and personal preferences of the presiding judge. Federal courts have attempted to reach a middle ground. A number of federal courts have found that the Ninth Amendment is a rule of judicial construction, or a guideline for interpretation, and not an independent source of constitutional rights (Mann v. Meachem, 929 F. Supp. 622 [N.D.N.Y. 1996]). These courts view the Ninth Amendment as an invitation to liberally inter- pret the express provisions of the Constitution. However, federal courts will not recognize constitutional rights claimed to derive solely from the Ninth Amendment (United States v. Vital Health Products, 786 F. Supp. 761 [E.D. Wis. 1992]). By itself, one court held, the Ninth Amendment does not enunciate any substantive rights. Instead the amendment serves to protect other fundamental liberties that are implicit, though not mentioned, in the Bill of Rights (Rothner v. City of Chicago, 725 F. Supp. 945 [N.D. Ill. 1989 ]). After Griswold, federal courts were flooded with novel claims based on unenumerated rights. Almost without exception, these novel Ninth Amendment claims were rejected. For example, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found no Ninth Amendment right to resist the draft (United States v. Uhl, 436 F.2d 773 [1970]). The Sixth Circuit Court ruled that there is no Ninth Amendment right to poss ess an unregistered submachine gun (United States v. Warin, 530 F.2d 103 [1976]). The Fourth Circuit Court held that the Ninth Amendment does not guarantee the right to produce, distribute, or exper iment with mind-altering drugs such as marijuana (United States v. Fry, 787 F.2d 903 [1986]). The Eighth Circuit Court denied a claim asserting that the Ninth Amendment guaranteed Americans the right to a radiation-free environment (Concerned Citizens of Nebraska v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 970 F.2d 421 [1992]). This series of cases has led some scholars to conclude that the Ninth Amen dment may be returning to constitutional hibernation. Yet the Ninth Amendment retains some vitality. In Roe v. Wade, the federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled that a state law prohibiting ABORTION in all instances except to save the life of the mother violated the right to privacy guaranteed by the Ninth Amendment (314 F. Supp . 1217 [1970]). On appeal the Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s ruling, stating that the right to privacy, “whether it be founded in the Four- teenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon STATE ACTION,aswefeelit is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy” (Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147 [1973]). Federal courts continue to rely on the Ninth Amendment in support of a woman’s constitutional right to choose abortion under certain circumstances. In the debate over whether a state could permit its residents to use mar ijuana for medical purposes, the Ninth Amen dment was raised as one line of justification. The right to control one ’s own body could not, in the view of supporters of legalization, be more funda- mental to a person. In G onzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 125 S. Ct. 2195, 162 L. Ed. 2d 1 (2005), the state of California legalized the use of medical marijuana, which ran counter to the national ban on the drug in the federal Controlled Substances Act. A woman who grew marijuana for her own medical use and did not sell it to others was charged with violating the federal law. Though the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that the federal law violated the plaintiff’s rights under the due process clause of the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT and the Ninth Amendment, the Supreme Court rejected such reasoning. The PLAINTIFF had also claimed that her non-commercial growing and use of marijuana did not affect interstate commerce and thus removed the COMMERCE CLAUSE as the basis for the federal law. The Supreme Court ruled that the commerce clause did apply and overturned the Ninth Circuit decision. FURTHER READINGS Abramson, Paul R., Steven D. Pinkerton, and Mark Huppin. 2003. Sexual Rights in America: The Ninth Amendment and the Pursuit of Happiness. New York: New York Univ. Press. Farber, Dan. 2007. Retained by the People: The “Silent” Ninth Amendment and the Constitutional Rights Americans Don’t Know They Have. New York: Basic Books. Hardaway, Robert M. 2003. No Price Too High: Victimless Crimes and the Ninth Amendment. Westport, Conn.: Praeger. Lash, Kurt. 2009. The Lost History of the Ninth Amendment. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 274 NINTH AMENDMENT Yoo, John Choon. 1993. “Our Declaratory Ninth Amend- ment.” Emory Law Journal 42. CROSS REFERENCES Constitution of the United States; Federalist Papers; Penumbra. NIRA See NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL RECOVERY ACT. NISI PRIUS [Latin, Unless before then.] A court of nisi prius is a court that tries questions of fact before one judge and, in some cases, a jury. In the United States, the term ordinarily applies to the trial level court where the case is heard by a jury, as opposed to a higher court that entertains appeals where no jury is present. The term is now obsolete in the United States except in New York and Oklahoma. v NIXON, RICHARD MILHOUS Richard Milhous Nixon was the 37th president of the United States. Though he made several major breakthroughs in his presidency, his involvement with the WATERGATE affair proved his undoing. In 1974 he became the only president ever to resign from office. Late in life Nixon’s advice as a political analyst and foreign affairs expert was sought by both parties. Nixon was born January 9, 1913, in Yorba Linda, California, the second of five sons of Francis A. Nixon and Hannah Milhous Nixon. His fathe r had grown up on a farm in Ohio and arrived in California in 1907. He worked as a trolley car motorman in Whittier, where he met Hannah Milhous. They were married in 1908. In 1922 they bought the grocery store and gas station where Nixon grew up. Nixon was a disciplined student who worked hard and received superior grades. He enjoyed playing football and participating in music, acting, and debating. A devout Quaker during his youth, he attended church four times per week. When Nixon was 12, his younger brother Arthur died of tubercular encephalitis. His older brother, Harold, died when Nixon was 20, after a ten-year battle with tuberculosis. Harold’s death was particularly traumatic for the family, as it had poured much of its limited resources into his treatment. Richard Milhous Nixon 1913–1994 ❖ 1913 Born, Yorba Linda, Calif. ◆ 1937 Graduated from Duke Law School 1950 Elected to U.S. Senate 1942–46 Served in U.S. Navy 1994 Died, New York City ◆◆ ◆ ◆◆◆◆ ◆ 1992 Seize the Moment published 1914–18 World War I 1961–73 Vietnam War 1939–45 World War II 1950–53 Korean War ▼▼ ▼▼ 19001900 19501950 19751975 20002000 19251925 ❖ ◆ 1946 Elected to U.S. House 1953–61 Served as vice president under Eisenhower 1952 Made Checkers speech ◆ ◆ 1983 Real Peace published 1978 RN published 1974 Facing impeachment, resigned from office in aftermath of Watergate 1972 Made landmark visit to China; signed anti- ballistic missile treaty with USSR; Watergate break-in and cover-up; reelected to presidency 1968 Elected as president of U.S. 1960 Lost presidential election to Kennedy 1962 Ran unsuccessfully for governor of California against incumbent Edmund "Pat" Brown Richard Nixon. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NIXON, RICHARD MILHOUS 275 After graduating from high school, Nixon wanted to attend an Ivy League college but instead entered Whittier College, a small Quaker school close to home and within his family’s financial means. He graduated second in his class and won a scholarship to Duke University Law School. At Duke, he was elected president of the Duke Bar Association and graduated third in his class. In 1937 Nixon was admitted to the California bar and joined the firm of Wingert and Bewley in Whittier. He participated in civic groups; taught Sunday school; and acted in a community theater troupe, where he met Thelma Catherine Ryan, who was known as Patricia or Pat. They were married June 21, 1940, and had two children, Patricia (“Tricia”) Nixon Cox and Julie Nixon Eisenhower. The Nixons would celebrate 53 years of marriage before Pat’s death in 1993. In 1941 Nixon took a job as an attorney with the Office of Price Administration in Washington, D.C. Seven months later, he applied for and received a Navy commission. He served as an operations officer with the South Pacific Combat Air Transport Command during WORLD WAR II. Shortly after his return from the service, Nixon ran for Congress against INCUMBENT California Democratic representative Jerry Voorhis. Nixon’s campaign literature portrayed him as a returning veteran who had defended his country in the mud and jungles of the Solomon Islands while his opponent never left Washington, D.C. It also implied that Voorhis was endorsed by a Communist-supported POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE. At a time when fear of Communist subversion was widespread, Nixon’s strategy worked. He came from behind in a race no one expected him to win to defeat Voorhis with 57 percent of the votes. Nixon quickly made his mark in Washing- ton, D.C. He became a vocal member of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, which investigated U.S. citizens suspected of having ties with or sympathies for the Commu- nist party. One such case brought Nixon into the national spotlight. In 1948 ALGER HISS,a former STATE DEPARTMENT official, was investi- gated for allegedly passing secret information to the Commu nist government in the former Soviet Union. Nixon’s determined pursuit of the case led to Hiss’s INDICTMENT and eventual conviction for PERJURY. In 1950 Nixon ran for the U.S. Senate against Democratic Representative Helen Gaha- gan Douglas. In an effort to discredit Douglas, he circulated a campaign flyer indicating that she had voted 354 times with Representative Vito Marcantonio of New York, a member of the Communist Workers party. The flyer, printed on pink paper, was know n as the pink sheet, and Nixon often referred to Douglas as the pink lady, a link to the color red associated with COMMUNISM. Nixon defeated Douglas by a secure margin of 680,000 votes, raising specula- tion that his strident campaign may have been unnecessary. In 1952 Republicans chose World War II hero General DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER as their nominee for president. Eisenhower chose Nixon as his running mate. The campaign encountered a crisis almost immediately. In September 1952 several newspapers disclosed that Nixon had received financial support from a secret fund raised by wealthy California business owners. This offense was viewed as shocking, and many people called for Nixon to withdraw from the ticket. Instead, he took the offensive and pleaded his case on national television, deliver- ing what came to be known as the “Checkers Speech.” Nixon maintained his innocence, disclosed his financial situation to show he was in debt, and pointed out that his wife did not have a mink coat but rather wore “a respectable Republican cloth coat.” He went on to say that a supporter in Texas had given the family a gift, a dog named Checkers, and that “the kids love the dog, and we’re going to keep it.” The public’s response was overwhelm- ingly positive and Nixon remained on the Republican ticket. Nixon had discovered the enormous power of television and had utilized it to his advantage, reaching a large audience without the need to endure press scrutiny. Eisenhower and Nixon received 55.1 per- cent of the popular vote in the 1952 election. Nixon served two terms as an unusually active vice president, honing his foreign policy skills during trips to 56 countries. Among the most famous of these journeys was a 1959 visit to Moscow, where he engaged in the celebrated Kitchen Debate with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. The two men informally debated the merits of capitalism versus Communism while they toured the kitchen of a model hom e at a U.S. fair. Nixon’s willingness to confront THERE IS ONE THING SOLID AND FUNDAMENTAL IN POLITICS —THE LAW OF CHANGE .WHAT’S UP TODAY IS DOWN TOMORROW . —RICHARD M. NIXON GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 276 NIXON, RICHARD MILHOUS critics and his ability to turn adversity to his advantage earned him praise and acclaim. In 1960, delegates at the Republican con- vention in Chicago nominated Nixon for president on the first ballot. He faced another young, energetic, popular contender, Demo- cratic senator JOHN F. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. In the first of four televised debates with Kennedy, Nixon, who had been ill and was exhausted from campaigning, appeared hag- gard, strained, and tense. His appearance cost him many votes even though he had a keen command of the facts and debated well— indeed, those who listened to the debates on radio rather than watching them on television felt that Nixon had outdone Kennedy. Nixon lost the election, suffering his first political defeat, by a mere 119,000 votes. In spite of allegations of voting irregularities, particularly in Chicago, Nixon decided not to demand a recount and instead gracefully conceded to Kennedy. After losing the 1960 election, Nixo n ran for governor of California against Edmund “Pat” Brown in 1962 but was unable to unseat the incumbent. He moved to New York to practice law and almost immediately began preparing his comeback. In January 1968 he announced his candidacy for the presidency and was nominated on the Republicans’ first ballot, defeating Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller of New York, and Governor RONALD REAGAN of California. The DEMOCRATIC PARTY was in a shambles in 1968. President LYNDON B. JOHNSON withdrew as a candidate because of growing domestic unrest and opposit ion to the VIETNAM WAR. Senator ROBERT F. KENNEDY was assassinated in June 1968 while campaigning for the Democratic nomina- tion. The Democrats nominated HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, Johnson’s vice president. Nixon defeated Humphrey by a narrow margin. During his first term, Nixon appointed a broad-based cabinet that included both con- servatives and liberals. In his inaugural speech, he said that he hoped to “bridge the generation gap” and bring the country back together after years of unrest over Vietnam and RACIAL DISCRIMINATION . While he continued to pursue foreign policy goals, he also achieved much on the domestic front. He responded to strong public demand for expanded government services, and proposed a family assistance program that, had it not been voted down by Congress, would have been the most far- reaching WELFARE reform in modern history. He supported health and safety protection on the job and housing allowances for disadvan- taged people. Nixon’s administration built more subsidized housing units than any administra- tion before or since. He expanded the Food Stamp Program and began the federal revenue- sharing program for local governments. An- other lasting legacy was the creation of the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Nixon also reshaped the SUPREME COURT. Under Chief Justice EARL WARREN, who had be en appointed by President Eisenhower, the Court had taken what many felt was an ideologically liberal turn. During his presidency, Nixon appointed four members to the court: WARREN E . BURGER, as chief justice; and HARR Y A. BLACK- MUN , LEWIS F. POWELL JR., and WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST, as associate justices. The Burger Court began a retreat from liberalism and judicial activism that continued through the 1980s and 1990s. Perhaps Nixon’s most noteworthy triumphs were in foreign policy. In 1972 Nixon and his chief foreign affairs adviser, HENRY KISSINGER, traveled to Communist China to begin the process of reestablishing diplomatic relations with the Beijing government. The visit marked a major shift in U.S. policy toward China. The two governments shared a history of animosity, and the United States had long recognized the Nationalist Chinese government of Chiang Kai-shek, based on the island of Taiwan, as the official government of China. After Nixon’s visit, the door was opened to diplomatic and trade dealings. Formal diplomatic relations with Communist China were established in 1978. Nixon also opened negotiations with the Communist government in the former Soviet Union. He initiated the process known as détente by holding three summit meetings with Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev. His efforts culminated in a breakthrough agreement in 1972 limiting the use of antiballistic missiles. One major goal that eluded Nixon in foreign policy was a quick end to the Vietnam War. After promising “peace with honor” during his campaign in 1968, he saw the war continue through his first term. Though the war would end in January 1973, an event in June of 1972 marked the beginn- ing of Nixon’s downfall. At that time, during GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NIXON, RICHARD MILHOUS 277 . 19 87 89 99th Congress, 1985– 87 98th Congress, 1983–85 97th Congress, 1981–83 96th Congress, 1 979 –81 95th Congress, 1 977 79 94th Congress, 1 975 77 93rd Congress, 1 973 75 92nd Congress, 1 971 73 91st. 19 47 49 79 th Congress, 1945– 47 78th Congress, 1943–45 77 th Congress, 1941–43 76 th Congress, 1939–41 75 th Congress, 19 37 39 74 th Congress, 1935– 37 73 rd Congress, 1933–35 72 nd Congress, 1931–33 71 st. in January 1 973 , an event in June of 1 972 marked the beginn- ing of Nixon’s downfall. At that time, during GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NIXON, RICHARD MILHOUS 277