“Decisions of this Court do not have intrinsic authority.”

—  Felix Frankfurter

Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46, 59 (1947).
Judicial opinions

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "Decisions of this Court do not have intrinsic authority." by Felix Frankfurter?
Felix Frankfurter photo
Felix Frankfurter 67
American judge 1882–1965

Related quotes

Henry Bickersteth, 1st Baron Langdale photo

“I have no authority to alter the practice of the Court.”

Henry Bickersteth, 1st Baron Langdale (1783–1851) British lawyer

Balls v. Margrave (1841), 3 Beav. 449.
Quote

William Brett, 1st Viscount Esher photo

“I do not think that a Judge would wish any statement which he may have made in the course of a case, merely obiter and casually, to be treated as necessarily being an authority on the subject in question; but when a Judge has thought it necessary for the purpose of a case to make a deliberate examination of the practice of his Court, and to state such practice, I do not think the authority of such statement can be got rid of merely by arguing that it was not really necessary for the actual decision of the case. I think that such a statement if cited as an authority is entitled to great weight, though of course not binding on us as a decision.”

William Brett, 1st Viscount Esher (1815–1899) British lawyer, judge and politician

Ex parte Rev. James Bell Cox (1887), L. R. 20 Q. B. D. 19.

Warren E. Burger photo

“In my conception of it, the primary role of the Court is to decide cases. From the decision of cases, of course, some changes develop, but to try to create or substantially change civil or criminal procedure, for example, by judicial decision is the worst possible way to do it. The Supreme Court is simply not equipped to do that job properly.”

Warren E. Burger (1907–1995) Chief Justice of the United States from 1969 to 1986

" Excerpts From Interview With Chief Justice Burger on Role of the Supreme Court http://www.nytimes.com/1971/07/04/archives/excerpts-from-interview-with-chief-justice-burger-on-role-of-the.html", The New York Times (July 4, 1971).

Sir Frederick Pollock, 1st Baronet photo

“The rule is this: that wherever there is a decision of a Court of concurrent jurisdiction, the other Courts will adopt that as the basis of their decision, provided it can be appealed from. If it cannot be appealed from, then they will exercise their own judgment.”

Sir Frederick Pollock, 1st Baronet (1783–1870) British lawyer and Tory politician

Leech v. North Staffordshire Railway Co. (1860), 29 L. J. M. C. 155.

James Eastland photo

“On May 17, 1954, the Constitution of the United States was destroyed because of the Supreme Court’s decision. You are not obliged to obey the decisions of any court which are plainly fraudulent sociological considerations.”

James Eastland (1904–1986) American politician

Eyes on the Prize: America's Civil Rights Years, 1954–1965, by Juan Williams, Viking Penguin, January 1, 1987, <nowiki>ISBN 978-0-670-81412-1</nowiki>, p. 38.
On August 12, 1955 in Senatobia, Mississippi, about the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. The Board of Education, which found racial segregation in the public schools unconstitutional
Unsourced

Hardinge Giffard, 1st Earl of Halsbury photo

“I yield to authority. I think the practice of the Court of Chancery for more than one hundred years, and the authority of Judges of very great eminence, establish such a course of practice and such a chain of authority, that I do not think I am at liberty to assume that either the Court or those very learned Judges were in error as to their powers and jurisdiction.”

Hardinge Giffard, 1st Earl of Halsbury (1823–1921) British politician

Attorney-General v. Marquess of Ailesbury (1887), L. J. (N. S.) 57 Q. B. 89.

Alberto Gonzales photo

“Of course, the power and authority of courts — whether to improperly take policymaking power for themselves or to engage in legitimate decision making — is dependent upon the weight of their judgment. That is, it depends on their credibility with the public and the other branches of government. Judicial decisions are obeyed, in large part, because the judgment of the federal Judiciary is respected. But it is perhaps underappreciated that when courts apply an activist philosophy that stretches the law to suit policy preferences, they actually reduce the credibility and authority of the Judiciary. In so doing, they undermine the rule of law that strengthens our democracy. In contrast, a judge who humbly understands the role of the courts in our tripartite system of government decides cases based on neutral principles. He generally defers to the judgment of the political branches, and respects precedent – the collective wisdom of those who have gone before. In so doing, that judge strengthens respect for the Judiciary, upholds the rule of law, and permits the people — through their elected representatives — to make choices about the issues of the day.”

Alberto Gonzales (1955) 80th United States Attorney General

Speech to American Enterprise Institute (January 17, 2007)

Byron White photo

“As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.”

Byron White (1917–2002) Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, American football player

Dissenting from the decision of the US Supreme Court in Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 at 222 (1973); also applied to Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

Dwight D. Eisenhower photo

“Mob rule cannot be allowed to override the decisions of our courts.”

Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890–1969) American general and politician, 34th president of the United States (in office from 1953 to 1961)

1950s, Address to the American People on the Situation in Little Rock (1957)

Mahatma Gandhi photo

“You say that the magistrate's decision is unsatisfactory because it would enable a person, however unclean, to travel by a tram, and that even the Kaffirs would be able to do so. But the magistrate's decision is quite different. The Court declared that the Kaffirs have no legal right to travel by tram. And according to tram regulations, those in an unclean dress or in a drunken state are prohibited from boarding a tram. Thanks to the Court's decision, only clean Indians or coloured people other than Kaffirs, can now travel in the trams.”

Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948) pre-eminent leader of Indian nationalism during British-ruled India

Comments on a court case in The Indian Opinion (2 June 1906)
1900s

Related topics