THE JUDICIARY: The Living Must Judge

The hands on the gilded clock stood precisely at noon when the court crier raised his sepulchral voice: "Oyez, oyez . . . draw near . . . God save the United States and this Honorable Court." Red curtains parted and into the hushed chamber walked the black-gowned justices of the Supreme Court of the U.S. Led by sad-faced Chief Justice Vinson, they took their high-backed seats, variously shaped and padded to fit their various curves.

Only William Orville Douglas, the justice with the cowlick and the friendly grin, was absent; he had flown off to the Middle East to climb a mountain and make a speech.

The others settled into familiar attitudes—little Justices Black and Frankfurter, alert and quick of eye, just able to peer over the back of the high mahogany bench; Murphy with a starched, far-off look; Jackson with his openwork, Dutch expression; Rutledge rocklike, Reed massive and heavy-jowled, Harold Burton with an air of avuncular interest. The court began to hand out what is promised by the marble figures on the wall: Divine Inspiration, Justice, Wisdom and Truth.

They were at the tag end of the term. Next week the court hopes to hang up its tailored black robes and go fishing, putter around its roses, and occasionally study legal papers. Behind them the Nine will leave some bewildered citizens, some disgruntled federal cops, a larger than usual number of baffled and unhappy lawyers, and one of the most adventurous records in the Supreme Court's long and loquacious history.

What Mark Twain Meant. Since 1937, the Nine had taken themselves pretty well out of the headlines, but they had made news nonetheless. Closer to the tradition of Holmes and Brandeis than to that of Hughes, they had plowed under old and respected landmarks; they had overturned, altogether, some 30 previous decisions of the Supreme Court; they had struck out boldly, sometimes brashly, into new grounds. Other courts had split more violently, but no court had quarreled so continuously and rambunctiously with itself, Whereas in the '20s and '30s the courts found themselves in solid agreement some 80% of the time, 70% of the time this term the court had found itself split.

The justices sometimes viewed the official opinions of their brethren on the court with the sharp, scornful rejoinders of political debaters: "Puts another weapon in the hands of the criminal world." "Converts the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact." "I give up—now I realize fully what Mark Twain meant when he said, 'The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it.' " Some citizens who were personally affected by the justices' rulings couldn't help but agree with the justices' earthiest criticisms of themselves.