History Podcasts

Louis Brandeis - History

Louis Brandeis - History


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Louis Brandeis

1856-1941

Supreme Court Justice

Louis Brandeis was born on November 13, 1856, in Louisville Kentucky. He graduated high school at the age of 14. He went to Louisville Public College and after traveling and studying with his family to Europe he enrolled at Harvard Law School. He graduated with the highest grades in the history of Harvard Law School a record that held for 80 years. He opened a law office in Boston with a classmate. the first Jew to be appointed to the US Supreme Court (1916). A liberal, he was known as "the people's attorney" and as an opponent of corporate monopoly. He was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Wilson. There was strong opposition to the nomination- of Brandeis, who was the first Jew to be nominated both because he was Jewish and because of his liberal views. For the first time, the Senate had a public hearing. The Senate confirmed his nomination by 47 to 22. While on the bench, Brandeis maintained his liberal posture in contrast to the Court's generally conservative bent. After his retirement in 1939, Brandeis worked for various Zionist causes in support of the establishment of a Jewish homeland.


Louis Brandeis - History

Mr. Brandeis first demonstrated an interest in the University of Louisville in the early 1920s. In 1925, the Justice proposed to his brother Alfred, a Louisvillian, a plan to make the University a major center of academic research. Though he later withdrew his offer of financial support for the University's School of Law, he carried out his decision to donate his personal papers, books, and pamphlets. Furthermore, Brandeis encouraged the University of Louisville to acquire additional research material, made specific suggestions for purchases, and donated funds to catalog, bind and shelve them.

The first Brandeis papers arrived in Louisville in the fall of 1936. Those string-tied packets of correspondence and reports on Palestine constitute Series 6 (Zionism/Palestine) of the microfilm publication. Other shipments followed, and in the fall of 1938 Brandeis directed the Boston law firm of Nutter, McClennen & Fish--successors to Brandeis, Dunbar & Nutter--to forward to the University those files that related to his pre-Court activities as a "people's attorney" (filmed as Series 1.) While Brandeis insisted on a general policy of keeping his papers closed during his lifetime, he did allow Alpheus T. Mason to examine them for his biography, Brandeis--A Free Man's Life (1946).

In September, 1978, forty-two years after Brandeis' initial gift, Nutter, McClennen & Fish donated their remaining Brandeis legal files to the University of Louisville's Archives & Records Center. This recent acquisition largely documents the jurist's work in estate planning with the firm of Warren & Brandeis, 1879 - 1897, and as senior partner in Brandeis, Dunbar & Nutter, 1897 - 1916. It also provides additional evidence of Brandeis' activities as an attorney for Progressive causes, and contains personal financial records. Approximately 20 percent of this recent accretion was restricted by the law firm, while the remainder was filmed as Series 10, Warren & Brandeis/Brandeis, Dunbar & Nutter, 1881 - 1947.

The bundles that Justice Brandeis sent to the University of Louisville remained in storage until 1940, when Professor Mason began work on his Brandeis biography. At that time, Pearl Weiler (later Von Allmen) was employed to arrange the voluminous collection, commencing a long association with the Brandeis Papers that continued after she was named Law School Librarian. Mrs. Von Allmen retained the donor's subject titles and arranged them chronologically within eight broad topical categories. At the same time, she created a subject card index that has since been lost. Finally, she prepared a folder title list for each series that served as the primary finding aid for the papers.

When materials were added to the papers by family members and Professor Mason, only those relating to the New England railroad merger (a topic within Series 1) were interfiled. The remainder was arranged separately and microfilmed as Series 9 (Addendum) of this edition. After processing was complete, the Brandeis Papers were housed at the University of Louisville School of Law, most recently in a conference room dedicated to the Herman Handmaker, an alumnus of the law school. Interestingly, urns containing the cremated remains of both Justice and Mrs. Brandeis are interred beneath the School of Law's front portico.

In 1970, Thomas L. Owen, assistant director of the Archives and Records Center, University of Louisville, observed the critical deterioration of many of the Brandeis documents. With the support of the director of the Archives & Records Center, Dr. William J. Morison, and the encouragement of the University's School of Law, Owen secured a grant in 1977 from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) to preserve on microfilm the Brandeis Papers at the University of Louisville, numbering more than 250,000 items.

Selected portions of the Brandeis Papers at the University of Louisville had been microfilmed previously. In 1943, the Zionist Archives in New York City underwrote the cost of microfilming Brandeis' "Zionism/Palestine" papers and in 1955, Dr. Charles J. Kennedy, University of Nebraska, had the "merger" clipping scrapbooks filmed. In 1979, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts, issued a commemorative eight-reel microfilm edition of Brandeis' published speeches and writings entitled "The Public Papers of Louis D. Brandeis," that included many printed items from the Brandeis Papers in Louisville. In addition, selected Brandeis Papers at the University of Louisville were the subject of Melvin I. Urofsky and David W. Levy's five-volume letterpress edition of Letters of Louis D. Brandeis (1973 - 1980.)

The Brandeis researcher will find four additional collections at the University of Louisville that complement the material found on this microfilm. While many volumes have been scattered, remnants of the book and pamphlet collection that the Justice donated to the University of Louisville can be found at the University Archives and in the Ekstrom and Law School libraries. In addition, the University Archives preserves photocopies of Brandeis correspondence gathered from around the world by Professor Levy for the five-volume edition of The Letters of Louis D. Brandeis. The Levy photocopies are arranged chronologically and are an excellent supplement to the original Brandeis Papers housed at the University. Brandeis correspondence is also found in the University President's and University Library's office files for the 1920 - 1945 period, also housed at the University Archives. Finally, the University Archives administers that portion of the Brandeis law files that was not filmed. Permission to examine those restricted files must be secured from Nutter McClennen & Fish in Boston. In addition, there have donations and additions to the collection that have occurred after the microfilming project was completed. Those items and be found listed at the end of the Addendum series.


Contents

Founding Edit

Middlesex University was a medical school located in Waltham, Massachusetts, that was at the time the only medical school in the United States that did not impose a quota on Jews. The founder, Dr. John Hall Smith, died in 1944. Smith's will stipulated that the school should go to any group willing to use it to establish a non-sectarian university. [15] Within two years, Middlesex University was on the brink of financial collapse. The school had not been able to secure accreditation by the American Medical Association, which Smith partially attributed to institutional antisemitism in the American Medical Association, [16] and, as a result, Massachusetts had all but shut it down.

Dr. Smith's son, C. Ruggles Smith, was desperate for a way to save something of Middlesex University. He learned of a New York committee headed by Dr. Israel Goldstein that was seeking a campus to establish a Jewish-sponsored secular university. Smith approached Goldstein with a proposal to give the Middlesex campus and charter to Goldstein's committee, in the hope that his committee might "possess the apparent ability to reestablish the School of Medicine on an approved basis." While Goldstein was concerned about being saddled with a failing medical school, he was excited about the opportunity to secure a 100-acre (40-hectare) "campus not far from New York, the premier Jewish community in the world, and only 9 miles (14 km) from Boston, one of the important Jewish population centers." [16] Goldstein agreed to accept Smith's offer, proceeding to recruit George Alpert, a Boston lawyer with fundraising experience as national vice president of the United Jewish Appeal. [ citation needed ]

Alpert had worked his way through Boston University School of Law and co-founded the firm of Alpert and Alpert. Alpert's firm had a long association with the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad, of which he was to become president from 1956 to 1961. [17] [18] He is best known today as the father of Richard Alpert (Baba Ram Dass). [19] He was influential in Boston's Jewish community. His Judaism "tended to be social rather than spiritual." [20] He was involved in assisting children displaced from Germany. [21] Alpert was to be chairman of Brandeis from 1946 to 1954, and a trustee from 1946 until his death. [17] By February 5, 1946, Goldstein had recruited Albert Einstein, whose involvement drew national attention to the nascent university. [22] Einstein believed the university would attract the best young people in all fields, satisfying a real need. [23]

In March 1946, Goldstein said the foundation had raised ten million dollars that it would use to open the school by the following year. [24] The foundation purchased Middlesex University's land and buildings for two million dollars. [23] The charter of this operation was transferred to the Foundation along with the campus. The founding organization was announced in August and named The Albert Einstein Foundation for Higher Learning, Inc. [25] The new school would be a Jewish-sponsored secular university open to students and faculty of all races and religions. [25]

The trustees offered to name the university after Einstein in the summer of 1946, but Einstein declined, and on July 16, 1946, the board decided the university would be named after Louis Brandeis. [26] Einstein objected to what he thought was excessively expansive promotion, and to Goldstein's sounding out Abram L. Sachar as a possible president without consulting Einstein. Einstein took great offense at Goldstein's having invited Cardinal Francis Spellman to participate in a fundraising event. Einstein also became alarmed by press announcements that exaggerated the school's success at fundraising.

Einstein threatened to sever ties with the foundation on September 2, 1946. Believing the venture could not succeed without Einstein, Goldstein quickly agreed to resign himself, and Einstein recanted. [27] Einstein's near-departure was publicly denied. [28] [29] Goldstein said that, despite his resignation, he would continue to solicit donations for the foundation. [28] On November 1, 1946, the foundation announced that the new university would be named Brandeis University, after Louis D. Brandeis, justice of the United States Supreme Court. [30] By the end of 1946, the foundation said it had raised over five hundred thousand dollars, [31] and two months later it said it had doubled that amount. [32]

Brandeis felt it was in no position to make the investment in the medical school that would enable it to receive accreditation, and closed it in 1947. Einstein wanted Middlesex University's veterinary school's standards to be improved before expanding to the school, [27] while others in the foundation wanted to simply close the veterinary school, [29] which, by the winter of 1947, had an enrollment of just about 100 students. [32] A professional study of the veterinary school recommended dismissing certain instructors and requiring end-of-year examinations for the students, but the foundation declined to enact any of the recommendations, to the dismay of Einstein and a couple of the foundation's trustees. [33]

In early June 1947, Einstein made a final break with the foundation. [27] [34] The veterinary school was closed, despite students' protests and demonstrations. [29] According to George Alpert, a lawyer responsible for much of the organizational effort, Einstein had wanted to offer the presidency of the school to left-wing scholar Harold Laski, [35] someone that Alpert had characterized as "a man utterly alien to American principles of democracy, tarred with the Communist brush." [22] He said, "I can compromise on any subject but one: that one is Americanism." [29] Two of the foundation's trustees, S. Ralph Lazrus and Dr. Otto Nathan, quit the foundation at the same time as Einstein. [27] In response, Alpert said that Lazrus and Nathan had tried to give Brandeis University a "radical, political orientation." [36] Alpert also criticized Lazrus' lack of fundraising success and Nathan's failure to organize an educational advisory committee. [36] Einstein said he, Lazrus, and Nathan "have always been and have always acted in complete harmony." [37]

Opening Edit

On April 26, 1948, Brandeis University announced that Abram L. Sachar, chairman of the National Hillel Commission, had been chosen as Brandeis' first president. [38] Sachar promised that Brandeis University would follow Louis Brandeis' principles of academic integrity and service. [39] He also promised that students and faculty would never be chosen based on quotas of "genetic or ethnic or economic distribution" because choices based on quotas "are based on the assumption that there are standard population strains, on the belief that the ideal American must look and act like an eighteenth-century Puritan, that the melting pot of America must mold all who all who live here into such a pattern." [40] Students who applied to the school were not asked their race, religion, or ancestry. [41]

Brandeis decided its undergraduate instruction would not be organized with traditional departments or divisions, and instead it would have four schools, namely the School of General Studies, the School of Social Studies, the School of Humanities, and the School of Science. [42] On October 14, 1948, [40] Brandeis University received its first freshman class of 107 students. [43] They were taught by thirteen instructors [44] in eight buildings on a 100-acre (40-hectare) campus. [45] Students came from 28 states and six foreign countries. [46] The library was formerly a barn, students slept in the former medical school building and two army barracks, and the cafeteria was where the medical school had stored cadavers. [15] Historians Elinor and Robert Slater later called the opening of Brandeis one of the great moments in Jewish history. [47]

Early years Edit

Eleanor Roosevelt joined the board of trustees in 1949. [48] Joseph M. Proskauer joined the board in 1950. [49] Construction of on-campus dormitories began in March 1950 with the goal of ninety percent of students living on campus. [50] Construction on an athletic field began in May 1950. [51] Brandeis' football team played its first game on September 30, 1950, a road win against Maine Maritime Academy. [52] Its first varsity game was on September 29, 1951, with a home loss against the University of New Hampshire. [53] Brandeis Stadium opened in time for a home win against American International College on October 13, 1951. [54] The team won four of nine games during its first season. Construction of a 2,000-seat amphitheater began in February 1952. [55]

The state legislature of Massachusetts authorized Brandeis to award master's degrees, doctorate degrees, and honorary degrees in 1951. [43] Brandeis' first graduating class of 101 students received degrees on June 16, 1952. [44] [56] Leonard Bernstein, director of Brandeis' Center of Creative Arts, planned a four-day ceremony to commemorate the occasion. [56] Held in the newly opened amphitheater, the ceremony included the world premier of Bernstein's opera Trouble in Tahiti. [56] [57] Eleanor Roosevelt and Massachusetts Governor Paul A. Dever spoke at the commencement ceremony. [58]

In 1953, Einstein declined the offer of an honorary degree from Brandeis, writing to Brandeis president Abram L. Sachar that "what happened in the stage of preparation of Brandeis University was not at all caused by a misunderstanding and cannot be made good any more." [59] Instead, at the graduation ceremony for Brandeis' second graduating class of 108 students, individuals given Brandeis' first honorary degrees included Illinois Senator Paul H. Douglas, Rabbi Louis Ginzberg, and Alpert. [60] 1953 also saw the creation of the Department of Near Eastern and Judaic Studies, one of the first academic programs in Jewish Studies at an American university. Among the founders were distinguished emigre scholars Alexander Altmann, Nathan Glatzer and Simon Rawidowicz. Brandeis inaugurated its graduate program, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, in 1954. [61] In the same year, Brandeis became fully accredited, joining the New England Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. [45] As of 1954, Brandeis had 22 buildings and a 192-acre (78-hectare) campus. [45]

In 1954, Brandeis began construction on an interfaith center consisting of separate Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish chapels. [62] Designed by the architectural firm of Harrison & Abramovitz, the three chapels surrounded a natural pond. [62] Brandeis announced that no official chaplains would be named, and attendance at chapel services would not be required. [62] The Roman Catholic chapel was named Bethlehem, meaning house of bread, and it was dedicated on September 9, 1955. [63] Dedicated on September 11, 1955, the Jewish chapel was named in memory of Mendel and Leah Berlin, parents of Boston surgeon Dr. David D. Berlin. [64] Named in memory of Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan, the Protestant chapel was dedicated on October 30, 1955. [64]

In 1956 Brandeis received a one-million-dollar donation from New York industrialist Jack A. Goldfarb to build a library. [65] [66] The building, named the Bertha and Jacob Goldfarb Library in his honor, was designed by Harrison & Abramovitz, a firm which designed many campus buildings in the 1950s. [66] Built of brick and glass, the library was designed to hold 750,000 volumes. [66]

A nine-foot bronze statue of Justice Louis D. Brandeis is a campus landmark. The sculpture, created by sculptor Robert Berks, was unveiled in 1956 in honor of the 100th anniversary of Brandeis' birth. [67] [68] Berks' wife Dorothy had been the Justice's personal assistant for 39 years and wore his actual robes to model the statue. [68]

After Brandeis University awarded an honorary doctorate to Israeli Premier David Ben-Gurion in 1960, [69] Jordan boycotted Brandeis University, announcing that it would not issue currency permits to Jordanian students at Brandeis. [70]

Beginning in fall 1959, singer Eddie Fisher established two scholarships at the University, one for classical and one for popular music, in the name of Eddie Cantor. [71]

On May 16, 1960, Brandeis announced it would discontinue its varsity football team. [72] President Abram Sachar pointed to the cost of the team as one reason for the decision. [72] Brandeis' football coach Benny Friedman said it was difficult to recruit football players who were also excellent students with so much competition in the Boston metropolitan area. [73] Brandeis said the discontinuation of varsity football would allow it to expand intercollegiate activity in other sports. [73] During its nine years of varsity play, Brandeis' football team recorded 34 wins, 33 losses, and four ties. [73] In 1985, Brandeis was elected to membership in the Association of American Universities, an association that focuses on graduate education and research. [74]

Student takeover of Ford Hall Edit

On January 8, 1969, about 70 black students entered then-student-center, Ford Hall, ejected everyone else from the building, and refused to leave. [75] The students' demands included the hiring of more black faculty members, increasing black student enrollment from four percent to ten percent of the student body, [76] establishing an independent department on African American studies, [77] and an increase in scholarships for black students. [78] The student protesters renamed the school Malcolm X University for the duration of the siege, distributing buttons with the new name and logo, and issued a list of fourteen demands for better minority representation on campus. [79] The students refused to allow telephone calls go through the telephone switchboard. [80] Over 200 white students staged a sit-in in the lobby of the administration building. [81] Classes continued on campus during the protest. [77] Other campuses that had protests at the same time included San Francisco State College, [82] the University of Minnesota, Swarthmore College, Cheyney State College, [83] Queens College, [84] and San Jose State College. [85]

President Morris B. Abram said that, although he recognized "the deep frustration and anger which black students here and all over the country—and often is—the indifference and duplicity of white men in relation to blacks", [81] the students' actions were an affront to the university, [76] Abram said that "nothing less than academic freedom itself is under assault." [81] The faculty condemned the students' actions as well. [76] On the third day of the protest, Abram proposed creating three committees to "spell out in detail those points which still divide us." [86] The students rejected the idea. [86]

On the fourth day of the protest, the Middlesex Superior Court issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the students to leave Ford Hall. [77] While Abram said he would not allow the order to be enforced by forcibly removing the students from Ford Hall, he did say that 65 students had been suspended for their actions. [81] On January 18, the black students exited Ford Hall, ending the eleven-day occupation of the building. [87] Brandeis and students still were not in agreement on one of the demands, namely the establishment of an autonomous department on African American studies. Brandeis insisted that such a department be subject to the same rules as any other department. [87] There had been no violence or destruction of property during the occupation, and Brandeis gave the students amnesty from their actions. [87] Ronald Walters became the first chair of Afro-American studies at Brandeis later the same year. [88] Ford Hall was demolished in August 2000 to make way for the Shapiro Campus Center, which was opened and dedicated October 3, 2002.

21st century Edit

In 2014, Brandeis announced it would offer an honorary doctorate to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, "a staunch supporter of women's rights", [90] and an outspoken campaigner against female genital mutilation, honor killing and Islamic extremism in general. After complaints from the Council on American-Islamic Relations and internal consultation with faculty and students, Brandeis publicly withdrew the offer, citing that Ali's statements condemning Islam [91] were "inconsistent with the University's core values". [92] 87 out of 511 faculty members at Brandeis signed a letter to the university president.

The university announced that the decision to withdraw the invitation was made after a discussion between Ayaan Ali and President Frederick Lawrence, stating that "She is a compelling public figure and advocate for women's rights . but we cannot overlook certain of her past statements". [93] According to Brandeis, Ali was never invited to speak at commencement, she was only invited to receive an honorary degree. [94] Ali said that Brandeis' decision surprised her because Brandeis said they did not know what she had said in the past even though her speeches were publicly available on the internet, calling it a "feeble excuse". [95] Ali stated that the university's decision was motivated in part by fear of offending Muslims. [95] She argued that the "spirit of free expression" referred to in the Brandeis statement has been betrayed and stifled. [96]

While some commentators such as Abdullah Antepli, the Muslim chaplain and adjunct faculty of Islamic Studies at Duke University, applauded the decision and warned against "making renegades into heroes", [97] other academic commentators such as the University of Chicago's Jerry Coyne [98] and the George Mason University Foundation Professor David Bernstein [99] criticized the decision as an attack on academic values such as freedom of inquiry and intellectual independence from religious pressure groups.

Presidents Edit

The presidents of Brandeis University are as follows.

Presidents of Brandeis University
Name Tenure Note
Abram L. Sachar 1948–1968 [38]
Morris B. Abram 1968–1970 [100]
Charles I. Schottland 1970–1972 [101]
Marver H. Bernstein 1972–1983 [102]
Evelyn E. Handler 1983–1991 [103]
Stuart H. Altman 1990–1991 [104] interim
Samuel O. Thier 1991–1994 [105]
Jehuda Reinharz 1994–2010 [106]
Frederick M. Lawrence 2011–2015 [107]
Lisa M. Lynch 2015–2016 interim
Ronald D. Liebowitz 2016–present

The Heller School Edit

The Heller School for Social Policy and Management is notable for its programs in social policy, health policy and management, and international development. Researchers at the graduate school and research institution research policy in health mental health substance abuse children, youth, and families aging international and community development developmental disabilities philanthropy and work and inequalities. U.S. News & World Report ranked the Heller School in the top 10 schools of social policy in its 2013 rankings. [108]

International Business School Edit

The Brandeis International Business School is a professional school dedicated to teaching and research in global finance, management, economic policy, international banking, microcredit lending, business and the environment, and related fields. Brandeis IBS has been ranked No. 1 in the U.S. by the Financial Times [109] for pre-experience finance master's programs for two years. [ when? ]

The School offers four graduate programs, a five-year BA/MA and BA/MBA, and undergraduate business programs specializing in international economic policy, corporate finance, asset management, marketing, real estate, and sustainability. Brandeis IBS offers four graduate programs: Master of Arts in International Economics and Finance (MA), Master of Science in Finance (MSF), MBA, and PhD. In addition, business major and minor programs are available to undergraduate students, along with five-year dual-degree BA/MA and BA/MBA programs, which allow Brandeis University undergraduates to complete a master's degree at Brandeis International Business School in conjunction with their studies at the university.

The Rabb School of Continuing Studies Edit

With more than 4,000 enrollments a year, [110] the Rabb School of Continuing Studies develops educational offerings across four distinct divisions. It provides professional development opportunities through degree programs, personal enrichment and lifelong learning.

Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Edit

One of four graduate schools on campus, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (GSAS) offers over 40 programs, 18 of which are doctoral programs. Brandeis graduate students are eligible to cross-register for courses at Boston College, Boston University, Tufts University, and the Graduate Consortium in Women's Studies at MIT. Brandeis is also a member of the Boston Library Consortium, [111] composed of 18 academic and research institutions in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire.

Rose Art Museum Edit

Established in 1961, the Rose Art Museum is a museum dedicated to 20th- and 21st-century art.

Library Edit

The Brandeis Library [112] provides resources and services to support research, scholarship, teaching, and learning on campus.

The library manages more than 1,500,000 physical volumes, and more than 600,000 electronic books, as well as electronic journals and online databases. As part of the library, the Robert D. Farber University Archives & Special Collections Department houses Brandeis University's unique and rare primary sources, which support teaching, research and scholarship at the university and beyond. The department comprises University Archives, containing materials related to Brandeis University, and Special Collections, including rare books, original manuscripts dating from the 13th to 21st centuries, unique primary source material, and a wide variety of visual material. [ citation needed ]

Subject strengths include the Holocaust and Jewish resistance to persecution Jewish-American and émigré writers, composers and performing artists left- and right-wing movements in the United States and Europe and American and European political leaders and social reformers. Major collections include material on the Spanish Civil War, novelist Joseph Heller, caricaturist Honoré Daumier, and Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis.

The schools of the University include:

The College of Arts and Sciences comprises 24 departments and 22 interdepartmental programs, which, in total, offer 43 majors and 47 minors.

The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, founded in 1959, is noteworthy for its graduate programs in healthcare administration, social policy, social work, and international development. [113] [114] Internships, research assistantships and other hands-on experiences are available throughout the curriculum. The global and experiential dimensions of education at Brandeis are carried out through international centers and institutes, which sponsor lectures and colloquia and add to the ranks of distinguished scholars on campus.

The Brandeis University Press, a member of the University Press of New England, publishes books in a variety of scholarly and general interest fields. The Goldfarb Library at Brandeis has more than 1.6 million volumes and 300,000 e-journals. The library also houses a large United States Government archive. Brandeis University is a part of the Boston Library Consortium, which allows its students, faculty, and staff to access and borrow books and other materials from other BLC institutions including Tufts University and Williams College.

Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies Edit

In 1980, Brandeis University established the Maurice and Marilyn Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies, [115] the first academic center devoted to the study of Jewish life in the United States. The Cohen Center's work spans basic research on Jewish identity to applied educational evaluation studies. The center's recent signature studies include research with participants in Taglit-Birthright Israel, investigations of synagogue transformation, and analyses of Jewish summer camping. CMJS research has altered the understanding of contemporary Jewish life and the role of Jewish institutions in the United States.

Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism Edit

The Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism was launched in September 2004 as the first investigative reporting center based at a United States university. [116] It was named for founding benefactors Elaine Schuster and Gerald Schuster.

The institute's major projects were:

  • the Political & Social Justice Project
  • the Justice Brandeis Innocence Project
  • the Gender & Justice Project. [117]

The Schuster Institute closed at the end of 2018 due to financial considerations. [116]

Steinhardt Social Research Institute Edit

The Steinhardt Social Research Institute [118] was created in 2005 from a gift from Michael Steinhardt as a forum to collect, analyze, and disseminate data about the Jewish community and about religion and ethnicity in the United States. The first mission of SSRI was to interpret the inherent problems with the National Jewish Population Survey of 2000 (NJPS). SSRI has done a Jewish Population Survey of the Greater Boston area, the results of which were released on November 9, 2006. [119]

The Institute collects and organizes existing socio-demographic data from private, communal, and government sources and will conduct local and national studies of the character of American Jewry and Jewish organizations. The work of the institute is done by a multidisciplinary staff of faculty and scholars, working with undergraduate and graduate students, and augmented by visiting scholars and consultants. The institute works in close collaboration with the Maurice and Marilyn Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies.

Women's Studies Research Center Edit

The Women's Studies Research Center (WSRC) is directed by Professor of Sociology and Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies Karen V. Hansen. [120] The WSRC was founded in 2001 by Professor Emerita of Sociology Shulamit Reinharz. It is home to three general programs:

  • The Scholars Program, which consists of about 70 academic scholars from around the world who study gender through an interdisciplinary lens
  • The Student-Scholar Partnership Program, which pairs Brandeis University undergraduate students with WSRC scholars for semester-long, paid research assistantships
  • The Arts Program, which oversees the Kniznick Gallery, devoted to feminist artwork

The Center is located at the Epstein Building on the Brandeis campus.

Rankings Edit

  • Brandeis was ranked No. 1 among the top 380 colleges in the United States for student engagement in community service, according to The Princeton Review in 2015. [130]
  • U.S. News & World Report ranked Brandeis tied for No. 34 in its 2016 annual list of Best National Universities. [131] Acceptance to Brandeis was characterized as "most selective". It was ranked No. 9 of Most Liberal Students in 2009, and No. 10 in 2014. [132]
  • No. 34 among Best Values in Private Universities according to Kiplinger's Personal Finance in its 2016 ranking of best value private universities in the United States. [133]
  • No. 2 among national universities for doctoral program in Neuroscience and Neurobiology (tied with Johns Hopkins University and Yale University), according to the National Research Council (United States) in 2010. [134]
  • No. 99 among 650 undergraduate institutions and 51st among national research universities in the 2017 ranking from Forbes.[135]
  • One of the Top 20 Small Research Universities based on the Faculty Scholarly Productivity Index (2006–07)[136]
  • Named the 6th happiest university by Unigo in 2012 [137] was ranked No. 1 by Financial Times from 2010 through 2013 for its Master of Arts in International Economics and Finance Program. [138]

Leslie Lamport (PhD, 1972) is a Turing Award-winning computer scientist.

Robert Zimmer (BA, 1968) is a mathematician and president of the University of Chicago.

V. Balakrishnan (physicist) (PhD, 1970) is an Indian theoretical physicist.

Angela Davis (BA, 1965) is an American political activist, philosopher, academic, and author.

Adam Cheyer (BA, 1988) is a co-founder of Siri and former director of engineering for the iPhone.

Debra Messing (BA, 1990) is an Emmy Award-winning actress.

Mitch Albom (BA) is a best-selling author known for writing Tuesdays with Morrie and The Five People You Meet in Heaven

Sidney Blumenthal (BA, 1969) is a journalist and political operative known for his association with President Clinton.

Guy Raz (BA, 1996) is a radio host for NPR.

Jeffrey C. Hall, Professor Emeritus of Biology won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2017.

Michael Rosbash, Peter Gruber Chair in Neuroscience won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2017

Anita Hill, an American lawyer, academic, and public figure, teaches at Brandeis.

Frank Bidart, is a poet who has received the Pulitzer Prize as well as the National Book Award twice.

Pauli Murray was a civil rights activist and lawyer who taught at Brandeis.

Eleanor Roosevelt was the longest-serving First Lady of the United States as the wife of Franklin D. Roosevelt, the first U.S. delegate to the United Nations, and an advocate for women's rights and civil rights for African Americans.

Leonard Bernstein is one of the most influential 20th-century composers, known for his symphonies and musicals such as West Side Story. He received seventeen Grammy Awards and eleven Emmy Awards.

Among the better-known graduates are co-creators of the television show Friends David Crane and Marta Kauffman, political activists Abbie Hoffman and Angela Davis, journalists Thomas Friedman and Paul Solman, Congressman Stephen J. Solarz, physicist and Fields medalist Edward Witten, mathematician and Abel Prize recipient Karen Uhlenbeck, novelist Ha Jin, political theorist Michael Walzer, actresses Debra Messing and Loretta Devine, philosopher Michael Sandel, Olympic Silver Medalist fencer Tim Morehouse, social and psychoanalytic theorist Nancy Chodorow, author Mitch Albom, filmmakers Debra Granik and Jonathan Newman, music producer Jon Landau, [139] and computer scientist Leslie Lamport.

Among the distinguished faculty, present and past, are mathematician Heisuke Hironaka, a Fields medalist, biologists and Nobel laureates Michael Rosbash and Jeffrey C. Hall, composers Arthur Berger, Leonard Bernstein, Martin Boykan, Eric Chasalow, Irving Fine, Donald Martino, David Rakowski, Harold Shapero, and Yehudi Wyner, social theorist Herbert Marcuse, psychologist Abraham Maslow, linguist James Pustejovsky, human rights activist Eleanor Roosevelt, Anita Hill, historian David Hackett Fischer, economist Thomas Sowell, chemist S Katharine Hammond, diplomat Dennis Ross, children's author Margret Rey, former United States Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, sociologist Morrie Schwartz, poets Olga Broumas and Adrienne Rich, author Stephen McCauley, and Pulitzer Prize–winning columnist Eileen McNamara.

Newspaper and yearbook Edit

  • Archon, the yearbook
  • The Barrister News Ltd was a politically neutral broadside weekly newspaper with nationally syndicated features, published 1985–1991. [140]
  • The Blowfish, a satirical newspaper founded in February 2006, is published every other Thursday. The first issue appeared inside The Hoot, and every issue since then has been published independently.
  • The Justice, which was founded in 1949 (one year after the university's inception) is an administratively independent weekly newspaper distributed every Tuesday during term.
  • The Brandeis Hoot, founded in 2005, is an independent weekly newspaper published on Fridays.

Magazines Edit

  • The Louis Lunatic, founded in the winter of 2004, is a student-run sports magazine released each semester, discussing Brandeis and national sports.
  • Gravity, a humor magazine founded in 1990
  • Laurel Moon, a literary magazine launched in 1991
  • Artemis, a feminist magazine published intermittently in the 1980s-1990s and revived during the fall 2013 semester.
  • Under the Robe, an arts and entertainment social tabloid published by The Barrister 1985–1988
  • Where the Children Play, a literature and arts magazine founded in 1994 by Phil Robinson and Abigail Myers

Journals Edit

  • Brandeis Economic & Finance Review, founded by Jordan Caruso in 2010, is a student-run online and print publication dedicated to issues in business, economics, and finance. Nobel Laureate Dr. Robert Solow contributed an original article for the Fall 2010 printed publication.
  • Brandeis International Journal, a student-run semesterly publication on international affairs
  • Brandeis Law Journal, founded in 2008, is the only undergraduate-edited legal publication not affiliated with a law school in the United States. [141]
  • The Brandeis Scope reports on research occurring on the Brandeis University campus and affiliated laboratories in the sciences.
  • Louis Magazine, a defunct journal of intellectual discourse, 1999–2002
  • The Pulse, reports on advances in medicine published by the Pre-Health Society

Brandeis fields 19 Division III varsity athletic programs. Brandeis athletic teams compete in the University Athletic Association (UAA).

Brandeis has won NCAA team championships in men's soccer (1976) and men's cross country (1983), as well as 24 individual titles. Brandeis teams have earned 17 NCAA Division III Tournament berths and won eight Eastern Collegiate Athletic Association (ECAC) New England crowns in the last decade. Nine teams have earned national rankings, with men's and women's basketball and men's and women's soccer all ascending to the top 10 in the nation during that span. [142] [143] [144] In 2017, the men's team reached the Sweet 16 of the NCAA Tournament for the sixth year in a row, and reached the Final Four for the second straight year. It was the fourth straight year they finished ranked a top ten team in the country. Also earning national rankings in '13-14 were women's cross country [145] and men's and women's tennis. [146] [147]

Brandeis also sponsors 20 club sports. Among them, ultimate frisbee, crew, archery and women's rugby have had success on a national level. The program's many intramural sports are open to students, faculty and staff.

Brandeis is classified among "R1: Doctoral Universities – Very High Research Activity". [148] In FY 2017, Brandeis spent $68.4 million on research and was ranked 174 in the nation by total R&D expenditure. [149] [150] These include sponsored research funds from sources including the National Institutes of Health the National Science Foundation and the US Department of Health and Human Services as well as a range of foundations. [151]

The university's Division of Science encompasses seven departments (Biochemistry, Biology, Chemistry, Computer Science, Mathematics, Physics, and Psychology), five interdepartmental programs (Biochemistry & Biophysics, Biological Physics, Biotechnology, Genetic Counseling, Molecular & Cell Biology, and Neuroscience), six science centers (Ashton Graybiel Spatial Orientation Laboratory, National Center for Behavioral Genomics, Rosenstiel Basic Medical Sciences Research Center, Sloan-Swartz Center for Theoretical Neurobiology, Benjamin and Mae Volen National Center for Complex Systems, and W.M. Keck Institute for Cellular Visualization), and more than 50 laboratories [152] that investigate fundamental life processes ranging from the structure and function of individual macromolecules to the mechanisms that control the behavior of whole organisms.

Faculty, postdoctoral fellows, graduate students and undergraduates investigate areas such as neuronal development and plasticity, signal transduction, immunology, the molecular basis of genetic recombination, and the three-dimensional structure of macromolecular assemblies. Brandeis science faculty include 12 National Academy of Science members, [153] three Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators, [154] two Howard Hughes Medical Institute professors, [154] two MacArthur Foundation Fellows, [155] and 15 American Association for the Advancement of Sciences Fellows. [156]

Brandeis undergraduate students have the opportunity to work with faculty, postdoctoral students and graduate students to conduct original laboratory research. [157] Brandeis also offers a number of funding resources to support independent undergraduate research projects. In 2008, Brandeis established a Science Posse program, a merit-based scholarship program that admits students based on their academic, leadership and communication skills, and their interests in studying science. Founded by Irving Epstein, the Henry F. Fischbach Professor of Chemistry, and supported by a Howard Hughes Medical Institute grant, the Science Posse program is focused on increasing the recruitment and retention of students from traditionally underrepresented groups in the sciences. The program recruits, trains, and provides mentoring and other services for 10 inner-city Atlanta students each year who are interested in studying science at the undergraduate level. [158]

In 2014, the National Science Foundation renewed funding for Brandeis' Materials Research Science and Engineering Center (MRSEC), which was established in 2008. This center supports interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary materials research and education that address fundamental problems in science and engineering that are important to society. [159] In particular, the center uses simplified components to create new materials that have some of the functionalities found in living organisms.

The university has an active student government, the Brandeis Student Union, [160] as well as more than 270 student organizations. [161] Fraternities and sororities aren't officially recognized by Brandeis University, as they are contrary to a central tenet of the university, namely, that student organizations be open to all students, with membership determined by competency or interest. According to an official handbook, "[e]xclusive or secret societies are inconsistent with the principles of openness to which the University is committed.". [162]

Brandeis has 11 a cappella groups, six undergraduate-run theater companies, one sketch comedy troupe (Boris' Kitchen, founded in 1987), [163] four improv-comedy groups, and many other cultural and arts clubs, as well as student activism groups that advocate for causes including environmentalism, immigration reform, LGBTQ rights, feminism, and anti-racism. Brandeis is also home to what has been cited as one of the country's few undergraduate-run law publications. [164] Of particular note is the Brandeis Academic Debate and Speech Society (B.A.D.A.S.S.), which consistently ranks as one of the top 10 debate teams in the United States, and participates across the globe in the World Universities Debating Championships each year. During the 2012–2013 school year, B.A.D.A.S.S. was the second most successful team overall on the American Parliamentary Debate Association Circuit. [165]

Cholmondeley's coffeehouse, commonly referred to as "Chums", is located in Brandeis' Usen Castle. Chums is a popular site for student performances and concerts, including Tracy Chapman, Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Matt Pond PA, and Genesis (notable as their first American performance). Early footage of Chums appears in the short documentary film, Coffee House Rendezvous. [166] Cholmondley's is named after a notoriously ill-tempered Basset hound that was the on-campus pet for Ralph Norman, the campus photographer during the first years of Brandeis. The dog roamed the campus after dark, growling at students, often nipping at their cuffs and making a general nuisance of himself. After his death, the coffee house was named for him, not so much in remembrance but in celebration. [167] In 2015, in an email to student workers of the coffee house, Brandeis administration announced the immediate closure of Chums Coffeehouse, leaving said student workers unemployed. After significant pushback from the student body and alumni alike, the administration determined to make the closure temporary while the space underwent renovations. [168]

Brandeis University's Campus Sustainability Initiative seeks to reduce the University's environmental and climate change impact. The University's accomplishments in the arena of sustainability include the creation of a student-organized on-campus Farmers' Market, the implementation of a single-stream recycling program, and the transition to GreenE certified wind power for 15% of the school's electricity needs. [169] Brandeis also offers an environmental studies academic program, which includes courses such as Greening the Ivory Tower: Improving Sustainability of Brandeis and Community, which serves as an incubator for student led sustainability projects. [170] Student projects have included greening campus offices, running after-school environmental education programs for children in the Waltham schools, and cleaning up local streams and ponds. [171] In addition, a student-led project in 2014 established a rooftop farm atop the Gerstenzang science building consisting of 1,500 potted milk crates. [172]

Students also have the option of taking courses with a "Community Engaged Learning" (CEL) aspect. Community-engaged learning is an aspect of the university's broad-based commitment to experiential learning.

Emergency medical services are provided by the Brandeis Emergency Medical Corps, a Massachusetts-certified EMT-Basic volunteer student organization [173] which does not charge a fee for any of its emergency services. [174]

Security escort services are provided around the campus and into Waltham by the student-run "Branvan," which runs on a daily schedule from 4:00 pm to 2:30 am on weekdays and from 12:00 pm to 2:30 am on weekends.

The university is 9 miles (14 km) west of Boston and is accessible through Brandeis/Roberts station on the Fitchburg Commuter Rail Line, a free shuttle that services Boston and Cambridge (Harvard Square) Thursday through Sunday, [175] the nearby Riverside subway station (above ground) on the Green Line, and the 553 MBTA bus. [176]

Wien International Scholarship [177] was instituted by Brandeis University for international undergraduate students. It was established in 1958 by Lawrence A. and Mae Wien. The family had three objectives: to further international understanding, to provide foreign students an opportunity to study in the United States, and to enrich the intellectual and cultural life at Brandeis. The Wien Scholarship offers full or partial tuition awards these awards are need-based and require the applicants to present outstanding academic and personal achievement. Each year, the recipients of the scholarship take a week-long tour of a destination in the United States. In previous years, the students have visited the United Nations in New York City, and did relief work in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. In April 2008, the university hosted a three-day-long celebration for the 50th anniversary of the program.

  1. ^"Academic Integrity". Brandeis.edu. Brandeis University. Archived from the original on August 19, 2011 . Retrieved March 9, 2012 .
  2. ^
  3. Summers, Eileen (May 27, 1954). "University Clocks Rapid Growth". The Washington Post. p. 55. 148628712.
  4. ^ As of June 30, 2020.
  5. U.S. and Canadian Institutions Listed by Fiscal Year 2020 Endowment Market Value and Change in Endowment Market Value from FY19 to FY20 (Report). National Association of College and University Business Officers and TIAA. February 19, 2021 . Retrieved February 19, 2021 .
  6. ^ abcdef
  7. "Overview". Brandeis University . Retrieved October 11, 2019 .
  8. ^NAICU – Member DirectoryArchived November 9, 2015, at the Wayback Machine
  9. ^ ab
  10. "Brandeis University". Forbes . Retrieved February 20, 2016 .
  11. ^
  12. "Boston Area Consortia (Cross Registration) | Office of the University Registrar". www.bu.edu . Retrieved February 20, 2016 .
  13. ^
  14. "The Boston Consortium". www.boston-consortium.org. Archived from the original on April 14, 2010 . Retrieved February 20, 2016 .
  15. ^
  16. "Brandeis University". The 2018 Forward College Guide. The Forward . Retrieved 5 March 2021 .
  17. ^
  18. "Pell Grant Recipients in Selective Colleges and Universities" (PDF) . Retrieved 2018-08-13 .
  19. ^
  20. "Most International Students National Universities". U.S. News & World Report . Retrieved 2018-08-13 .
  21. ^
  22. "Brandeis University: Fast Facts". Brandeis.edu . Retrieved 2018-08-13 .
  23. ^
  24. "Notable Alumni | About | Brandeis University". www.brandeis.edu . Retrieved 2016-02-20 .
  25. ^
  26. Massachusetts Institutions – NECHE, New England Commission of Higher Education , retrieved May 26, 2021
  27. ^ ab
  28. Gardner, R. H. (May 29, 1952). " ' A School Of The Spirit' Graduates Its First". The Baltimore Sun. p. 14. 541745484.
  29. ^ ab
  30. Reis, Arthur H., Jr. "The Founding" (PDF) . Brandeis Review, 50th Anniversary Edition. pp. 42–43 . Retrieved May 17, 2006 . Founder's son, C. Ruggles Smith, quoted: "From its inception, Middlesex was ruthlessly attacked by the American Medical Association, which at that time was dedicated to restricting the production of physicians, and to maintaining an inflexible policy of discrimination in the admission of medical students. Middlesex, alone among medical schools, selected its students on the basis of merit, and refused to establish any racial quotas.
  31. ^ ab
  32. "George Alpert, 90 was a Founder and First Chairman of Brandeis". The Boston Globe. September 13, 1988. p. 82.
  33. ^
  34. Lyall, Sarah (September 13, 1988). "George Alpert, 90, Ex-President Of New Haven Line and a Lawyer". The New York Times. p. D26.
  35. ^
  36. "Ram Dass". Ram Dass Tapes. Archived from the original on 23 June 2003 . Retrieved 26 April 2009 .
  37. ^
  38. Stevens, Jay (1988). Storming Heaven: LSD and the American Dream. Grove Press. ISBN0-8021-3587-0 . p. 152
  39. ^
  40. Lattin, Don (2004). Following Our Bliss: How the Spiritual Ideals of the Sixties Shape Our Lives Today. HarperCollins. ISBN0-06-073063-3 . p. 161
  41. ^ ab
  42. Reis Jr., Arthur H. "The Albert Einstein Involvement" (PDF) . Brandeis Publications 50th review. pp. 60–61 . Retrieved May 4, 2006 . Source for Einstein agreeing to establishment of the foundation Feb. 5th, 1946, foundation incorporated Feb. 25 for Alpert quotation, "a man utterly alien to American principles of democracy, tarred with the Communist brush" for Einstein's refusal to accept an honorary degree in 1953.
  43. ^ ab
  44. "Liberal University to Be Set Up by Jewish Body". The Baltimore Afro-American. August 31, 1946. p. 10. 531588568.
  45. ^
  46. "College Sought by Jewish Group". The New York Times. March 19, 1946. p. 19. 107465002.
  47. ^ ab
  48. "New Jewish Unit Plans University". The New York Times. August 20, 1946. p. 10. 107605957.
  49. ^
  50. Reis, Jr., Arthur H. "Naming the University" (PDF) . Brandeis Review, 50th Anniversary Edition. pp. 66–67 . Retrieved May 3, 2006 .
  51. ^ abcd
  52. "Dr. Einstein Quits University Plan: Withdraws Support of Brandeis and Bars Use of His Name by Einstein Foundation". The New York Times. June 22, 1947. p. 16. 107904030.
  53. ^ ab
  54. "Goldstein Quits Einstein Agency". The New York Times. September 26, 1946. p. 27. 107727508.
  55. ^ abcd
  56. Sachar, Abram L. (1995). Brandeis University: A Host at Last . Brandeis University Press, distributed by University Press of New England. pp. 18–22. ISBN0-87451-585-8 .
  57. ^
  58. "Disclose Plans for New College". The New York Times. November 7, 1946. p. 28. 107542398.
  59. ^
  60. "Brandeis Fund Growing". The New York Times. Dec 19, 1946. p. 37. 107429813.
  61. ^ ab
  62. "Brandeis University to Open in Fall of '48". The New York Times. February 11, 1947. p. 25. 107822860.
  63. ^
  64. "Einstein Gives Up Support of New College". The Baltimore Sun. Associated Press. June 22, 1947. p. A2. 542673850.
  65. ^
  66. "Einstein Severs Relations With University Fund". The Washington Post. June 22, 1947. p. M1. 151982804.
  67. ^
  68. "Brandeis University to Open As Planned". The New York Times. June 25, 1947. p. 6. 107894324.
  69. ^ ab
  70. "Left Bias Charged in University Row". The New York Times. June 23, 1947. p. 24. 107902395.
  71. ^
  72. "Einstein Backs Two Who Quit University". The New York Times. June 30, 1947. p. 9. 107893714.
  73. ^ ab
  74. "Sachar Heads University". The New York Times. April 27, 1948. p. 3. 108194770.
  75. ^
  76. "Brandeis University Pledged to His Ideals". The New York Times. June 15, 1948. p. 34. 108183254.
  77. ^ ab
  78. Fenton, John H. (October 8, 1948). "Sachar Installed As Brandeis Head". The New York Times. p. 22. 108273404.
  79. ^
  80. Pearson, Drew (October 17, 1948). "Brandeis University". The Washington Post. p. M15. 152041623.
  81. ^
  82. "Brandeis Inaugural: University in Waltham, Mass., Establishes Four Schools". The New York Times. October 3, 1948. p. E7. 108268080.
  83. ^ ab
  84. Fine, Benjamin (May 13, 1951). "Brandeis Expanding". The New York Times. p. B9. 112215962.
  85. ^ ab
  86. "Brandeis to Hold First Graduation: 'Pilot' Class of 101 to Receive Degrees—Mrs. Roosevelt Will Deliver Address". The New York Times. June 15, 1952. p. 64. 112280587.
  87. ^ abc
  88. "Brandeis Builds: Facilities Will Be Provided for Graduate Science Studies". The New York Times. January 31, 1954. p. E9. 113152034.
  89. ^
  90. "Interracial Award Established At Brandeis University". Atlanta Daily World. August 8, 1950. p. 2. 490919935.
  91. ^
  92. Slater, Elinor Slater, Robert (1999). Great Moments in Jewish History. Jonathan David Company, Inc. pp. 121–123. ISBN0-8246-0408-3 .
  93. ^
  94. "Mrs. Roosevelt Joins Board of Brandeis U.". The New York Times. June 18, 1949. p. 15. 105958940.
  95. ^
  96. "Proskauer on Brandeis Board". The New York Times. February 17, 1950. p. 20. 111518559.
  97. ^
  98. "Brandeis U. to Expand: President Announces Plans to Build Student Dormitories". The New York Times. February 20, 1950. p. 26. 111518559.
  99. ^
  100. "Brandeis Starts Athletic Field". The New York Times. May 29, 1950. p. 13. 111645250.
  101. ^
  102. "Brandeis Freshmen on Top". The New York Times. October 1, 1950. p. 162. 111395437.
  103. ^
  104. "Brandeis Loses Opener, 33-20". The New York Times. September 30, 1951. p. 128. 112140418.
  105. ^
  106. "Brandeis Wins, 25-7". The Washington Post. October 14, 1951. p. C5. 152355750.
  107. ^
  108. "Brandeis U. Starts Its Amphitheatre". The New York Times. February 24, 1952. p. 74. 112534800.
  109. ^ abc
  110. Taubman, Howard (June 13, 1952). "Brandeis U. Begins Festival of Arts". The New York Times. p. 20. 112247624.
  111. ^
  112. Taubman, Howard (June 14, 1952). "Bernstein Opera Has Its Premiere". The New York Times. p. 12. 112268443.
  113. ^
  114. "Brandeis Graduates 101 in Its First Class". The New York Times. June 17, 1952. p. 25. 112287529.
  115. ^
  116. Sachar, Abram L. (1995). Brandeis University: A Host At Last . Brandeis University Press. p. 38. ISBN9780874515855 .
  117. ^
  118. "Douglas Gets Degree: Senator Honored at Brandeis—Urges Values in Red Fight". The New York Times. June 15, 1953. p. 27. 112720176.
  119. ^
  120. "Brandeis Dedicates Its Graduate School". The New York Times. January 15, 1954. p. 21. 113153688.
  121. ^ abc
  122. "Brandeis to Build Interfaith Center". The New York Times. May 13, 1954. p. 26. 112935577.
  123. ^
  124. Fenton, John H. (September 10, 1955). "Catholic Chapel at Brandeis Open: Cushing, at Dedication on Campus, Lauds University for Aid to Religion". The New York Times. p. 19. 113254552.
  125. ^ ab
  126. "3 Brandeis Chapels will be Dedicated". The New York Times. October 23, 1955. p. 111. 113339821.
  127. ^
  128. "Izler Solomon Named Symphony Head in 1956". Indianapolis: The National Jewish Post. 31 August 1956. p. 32 . Retrieved 3 November 2018 . It was learned this month that former Indianapolis resident Jack Goldfarb of New York City gave a million-dollar gift to build a library at Brandeis university in Waltham, Mass. The library will be named in his honor.
  129. ^ abc
  130. "Brandeis University Gets Gift of $1,000,000 for Library". The New York Times. April 12, 1956. p. 49. 113609504.
  131. ^
  132. "Memorial to Brandeis: 9-Foot Statue of Justice to Be Unveiled Nov. 13". The New York Times. April 15, 1956. p. 39. 113897312.
  133. ^ ab
  134. Cardillo, Julian (28 April 2016). "Louis Brandeis statue enlivens campus". Brandeis University . Retrieved 3 November 2018 .
  135. ^
  136. Spiegel, Irving (Mar 10, 1960). "Ben-Gurion Cites Spirit of Israel: Receiving Honorary Degree at Brandeis, He Stresses Philosophy and Science". The New York Times. p. 9. 115037889.
  137. ^
  138. "Jordan Boycotts Brandeis U.". The New York Times. July 5, 1960. p. 63. 115192047.
  139. ^
  140. "Schottland to Head Social Welfare School at Brandeis University". Jewish Telegraphic Agency. December 1, 1958 . Retrieved May 10, 2016 .
  141. ^ ab
  142. "Brandeis Quits College Gridiron". The Baltimore Sun. May 17, 1960. p. S23. 542277219.
  143. ^ abc
  144. Lipsyte, Robert M. (May 17, 1960). "Team Also Cited: Brandeis Athletic Director Says Football Expenses Outweighed Returns". The New York Times. p. 47. 114978291.
  145. ^
  146. "UF Invited Into Prestigious Association of Universities". The Gainesville Sun. July 9, 1985.
  147. ^
  148. "The Student Occupation of Ford Hall, January 1969". Brandeis University Archives, Remembering Ford & Sydeman Halls. Archived from the original on 2013-01-27 . Retrieved 2013-02-09 .
  149. ^ abc
  150. "70 Seize Hall at Brandeis: Faculty Condemns Action By Negro Students". The Baltimore Sun. January 9, 1969. p. A8. 539247176.
  151. ^ abc
  152. Fenton, John H. (January 11, 1969). "Students Resume Brandeis Classes: Protest by Negroes Goes On as Negotiations Continue". The New York Times. p. 17. 118533415.
  153. ^
  154. "Negro Students Accuse Brandeis Of 'Racist Policies,' Seize Building". The Washington Post. January 9, 1969. p. A3. 147744840.
  155. ^
  156. "The Ten Demands". Brandeis University Archives, Remembering Ford & Sydeman Halls . Retrieved 2013-02-09 .
  157. ^
  158. "Brandeis Takeover". Chicago Daily Defender. January 11, 1969. p. 2. 493463521.
  159. ^ abcd
  160. "Brandeis U. Head Suspends 65 in Campus Protest: Offers to Resign Escalate Demands". The Washington Post. January 12, 1969. p. 10. 143655739.
  161. ^
  162. "Calif. Students, Police Battle Again". The Washington Post. January 10, 1969. p. A9. 147751670.
  163. ^
  164. "Compromise Ends Student Protest at Minnesota Campus". The Washington Post. January 16, 1969. p. A7. 147731392.
  165. ^
  166. Fenton, John H. (January 12, 1969). "Head of Brandeis Suspends Negroes: Abram Ousts 65 Students for Occupying Building". The New York Times. p. 38. 118563168.
  167. ^
  168. "Shot Fired In Flareup At San Jose". The Washington Post. January 18, 1969. p. A3. 143519554.
  169. ^ ab
  170. "All-California Teacher Strike Is Threatened". The Washington Post. January 13, 1969. p. A3. 147730200.
  171. ^ abc
  172. "64 Black Students End 'Occupation' at Brandeis". The Washington Post. January 19, 1969. p. 3. 147736439.
  173. ^
  174. Hevesi, Dennis (September 14, 2010). "Ronald Walters, Rights Leader and Scholar, Dies at 72". The New York Times.
  175. ^
  176. Rahman, Nashrah (11 November 2008). "Research facility dedicated to donors". The Justice . Retrieved 21 January 2019 .
  177. ^
  178. Lee, Morgan (April 9, 2014). "Brandeis University Rescinds Honorary Degree From Ayaan Hirsi Ali Over Criticism of Islam". The Christian Post.
  179. ^
  180. van Bakel, Rogier (November 2007). " ' The Trouble Is the West': Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Islam, immigration, civil liberties, and the fate of the West". Reason.com. Reason Foundation.
  181. ^
  182. Pérez-Peña, Richard Vega, Tanzina (April 8, 2014). "Brandeis Cancels Plan to Give Honorary Degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Critic of Islam". The New York Times.
  183. ^
  184. "Statement from Brandeis University". Brandeis University. April 8, 2014. Archived from the original on June 15, 2014.
  185. ^
  186. Stott, Emily (April 11, 2014). "Students' outcry prompts Brandeis to reconsider award". The Brandeis Hoot. Archived from the original on March 4, 2016.
  187. ^ ab
  188. Kelly, Megyn (April 9, 2014). "Ayaan Hirsi Ali on withdrawal of honorary degree". The Kelly File. Fox News. Archived from the original (transcript) on 2014-05-12 . Retrieved 2014-05-24 .
  189. ^
  190. "Ayaan Hirsi Ali: 'They Simply Wanted Me to be Silenced ' ". Time. April 9, 2014. Archived from the original on June 10, 2014.
  191. ^
  192. Antepli, Abdullah (April 10, 2014). "Hats off to Brandeis University!". The Chronicle. Duke Student Publishing Company. Archived from the original on 2014-07-08 . Retrieved April 16, 2014 .
  193. ^
  194. Coyne, Jerry A. (April 9, 2014). "Brandeis University cancels plans to give Ayaan Hirsi Ali an honorary degree". Why Evolution Is True. Archived from the original on June 19, 2014 . Retrieved April 16, 2014 .
  195. ^
  196. Bernstein, David (2014-04-10). "More on the Brandeis-Hirsi Ali controversy". The Washington Post . Retrieved 2014-04-16 .
  197. ^
  198. Fenton, John H. (October 7, 1968). "Abram, Pledging Student Role, Is Installed as 2d Brandeis Head". The New York Times. p. 30. 118336604.
  199. ^
  200. "Brandeis U. Names Third President". The New York Times. December 19, 1970. p. 24. 118743887.
  201. ^
  202. Reinhold, Robert (December 18, 1971). "Loses Fourth President: Bernstein, Political Scientist at Princeton, Is Named". The New York Times. p. 33. 119211061.
  203. ^
  204. "Brandeis Installs Its 5th President". The New York Times. October 10, 1983. p. A15. 424806105.
  205. ^
  206. "Interim President Chosen At Brandeis University". Orlando Sentinel. September 6, 1990. Archived from the original on May 13, 2015.
  207. ^
  208. "Brandeis University Selects Samuel Thier As Its New President". The New York Times. May 5, 1991. 428082753.
  209. ^
  210. Sinert, Michael L. (March 3, 1994). "Professor to lead Brandeis: Reinharz to be named president March 2". Jewish Advocate. p. 1. 205204310.
  211. ^
  212. Bruss, Andrew (October 15, 2010). "New Brandeis head: campuses are fertile ground for hate speech". Jewish Advocate. p. 4. 759966789.
  213. ^
  214. "The Heller School For Social Policy and Management – An Overview". heller.brandeis.edu . Retrieved 15 September 2014 .
  215. ^
  216. "Brandeis IBS ranks among best in the world". www.brandeis.edu . Retrieved 5 June 2014 .
  217. ^
  218. "4,000 Students a Year". www.brandeis.edu . Retrieved 5 June 2014 .
  219. ^
  220. "Boston Library Consortium". www.blc.org. Archived from the original on 13 December 2013 . Retrieved 5 June 2014 .
  221. ^
  222. "Library". Brandeis Library. 27 September 2018 . Retrieved 27 September 2018 .
  223. ^
  224. "About the Heller School". heller.brandeis.edu . Retrieved 2014-04-16 .
  225. ^
  226. "Master of Arts in Teaching Program (MAT)". brandeis.edu . Retrieved 2014-04-16 .
  227. ^
  228. "Maurice & Marilyn Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies". Brandeis.edu . Retrieved 2014-04-16 .
  229. ^ ab
  230. Lynch, Lisa (20 December 2018). "Wind-Down of the Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism". Waltham, Massachusetts: Brandeis University . Retrieved 12 January 2019 . the Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism will be closing at the end of December
  231. ^
  232. "The Elaine and Gerald Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism". Brandeis.edu . Retrieved 2014-04-16 .
  233. ^
  234. "Steinhardt Social Research Institute". brandeis.edu. 2013-09-30 . Retrieved 2014-04-16 .
  235. ^
  236. Paulson, Michael (2006-11-10). "Jewish population in region rises". The Boston Globe.
  237. ^Karen V. Hansen
  238. ^
  239. "Academic Ranking of World Universities 2020: National/Regional Rank". Shanghai Ranking Consultancy . Retrieved August 15, 2020 .
  240. ^
  241. "America's Top Colleges 2019". Forbes . Retrieved August 15, 2019 .
  242. ^
  243. "Wall Street Journal/Times Higher Education College Rankings 2021". The Wall Street Journal/Times Higher Education . Retrieved October 20, 2020 .
  244. ^
  245. "2021 Best National University Rankings". U.S. News & World Report . Retrieved September 24, 2020 .
  246. ^
  247. "2020 National University Rankings". Washington Monthly . Retrieved August 31, 2020 .
  248. ^
  249. "Academic Ranking of World Universities 2020". Shanghai Ranking Consultancy. 2020 . Retrieved August 15, 2020 .
  250. ^
  251. "QS World University Rankings 2022". Quacquarelli Symonds . Retrieved June 18, 2021 .
  252. ^
  253. "World University Rankings 2021". Times Higher Education . Retrieved September 2, 2020 .
  254. ^
  255. "2021 Best Global Universities Rankings". U.S. News & World Report . Retrieved October 20, 2020 .
  256. ^
  257. "Colleges Where Students Are The Most Engaged In Community Service". The Huffington Post . Retrieved 2015-08-30 .
  258. ^
  259. "Brandeis University | Best College | US News". colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com . Retrieved 2015-09-09 .
  260. ^
  261. Healy, Meaghan. "The 10 Most Progressive Campuses – College Magazine". College Magazine . Retrieved 2015-08-30 .
  262. ^
  263. "Kiplinger's Best College Values 2016". Kiplinger's Personal Finance. December 2015.
  264. ^
  265. "Doctoral Programs by the Numbers". The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2010-09-30. ISSN0009-5982 . Retrieved 2015-08-30 .
  266. ^
  267. "America's Top Colleges". Forbes. Dec 29, 2017.
  268. ^
  269. "Rankings:Fast Facts" . Retrieved 4 May 2009 .
  270. ^
  271. "Unigo: Top 10 Colleges with the Happiest Students". Huffingtonpost.com . Retrieved 2013-12-09 .
  272. ^
  273. "Business school ranked No. 1 by Financial Times | BrandeisNOW". BrandeisNOW . Retrieved 2015-08-30 .
  274. ^
  275. "Jon Landau '68 | Brandeis Magazine". Brandeis Magazine . Retrieved 2015-09-05 .
  276. ^
  277. Eliot Wilczek. "The Barrister | Archives and Special Collections, Brandeis University". Lts.brandeis.edu. Archived from the original on 2012-03-04 . Retrieved 2013-12-09 .
  278. ^
  279. "Brandeis University Law Journal" . Retrieved 2021-05-07 .
  280. ^
  281. "D3soccer.com Men's Top 25, Week 3". www.d3soccer.com . Retrieved 25 June 2014 .
  282. ^
  283. "NSCAA/Continental Tire NCAA Division III Women's – National – Poll 3 – September 17, 2013". www.nscaatv.com. Archived from the original on 25 June 2014 . Retrieved 25 June 2014 .
  284. ^
  285. "D3hoops.com men's Top 25, Week 3". www.d3hoops.com . Retrieved 25 June 2014 .
  286. ^
  287. "USTFCCCA NCAA Division III National Coaches' Poll" (PDF) . www.ustfccca.org . Retrieved 25 June 2014 .
  288. ^
  289. "Division III Men's National Rankings – March 27". www.itatennis.com. Archived from the original on 3 April 2014.
  290. ^
  291. "Division III Women's National Rankings Administered by the ITA". www.itatennis.com. Archived from the original on 20 April 2014 . Retrieved 25 June 2014 .
  292. ^
  293. "Carnegie Classifications – Institution Profile". Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research . Retrieved March 30, 2020 .
  294. ^
  295. "Rankings by total R&D expenditures". nsf.gov. National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. Archived from the original on 13 January 2017 . Retrieved 18 July 2020 .
  296. ^
  297. "NSF – NCSES Academic Institution Profiles – Brandeis University : Total R&D expenditures, by source of funds and R&D field: 2017". ncsesdata.nsf.gov . Retrieved 18 July 2020 .
  298. ^
  299. "- Brandeis University". www.brandeis.edu. Archived from the original on 2015-11-17 . Retrieved 2015-11-16 .
  300. ^
  301. "Life Sciences Website". www.bio.brandeis.edu.
  302. ^ National Academy Members, http://www.brandeis.edu/about/faculty/national.html
  303. ^ ab Howard Hughes Medical Institute HHMI Investigators and Professors http://www.hhmi.org/scientists/browse?kw=brandeis&sort_by=field_scientist_last_name&sort_order=ASC
  304. ^ MacArthur Fellows, https://www.macfound.org/fellows/650/
  305. ^
  306. "Distinguished Faculty". www.brandeis.edu.
  307. ^
  308. "Student Research". www.brandeis.edu.
  309. ^ "Broadening Access to Science: Science Posse". Howard Hughes Medical Institute. May 2014. Archived from the original on September 15, 2014.
  310. ^ "MRSEC Program Overview". Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers.
  311. ^
  312. "Brandeis University Student Union". union.brandeis.edu. Archived from the original on 2014-04-17 . Retrieved 2014-04-16 .
  313. ^
  314. "Club Center". My Brandeis . Retrieved 26 April 2009 .
  315. ^
  316. "2007–2008 Rights & Responsibilities Handbook, Appendix B: University Policy on Fraternities and Sororities". Brandeis University . Retrieved 2008-03-17 .
  317. ^
  318. "Boris' Kitchen". Boris' Kitchen.
  319. ^
  320. "Q&A with ALDF Staff Attorney about Pursuing a Career in Animal Law". Animal Legal Defense Fund. Archived from the original on 2010-11-19 . Retrieved 2011-01-07 .
  321. ^
  322. "Standings (2013–2014)". Apdaweb. Archived from the original on 2014-01-03 . Retrieved 2013-12-09 .
  323. ^
  324. Steeg, Ted (1969). Coffee House Rendezvous. Coffee Information Service. Event occurs at 5:10.
  325. ^
  326. Elcik, Catherine (18 October 2007). "Oppenheimer at Brandeis". Globe Newspaper Company . Retrieved 26 April 2009 .
  327. ^
  328. Charlotte Aaron (March 20, 2015). "Student coffeehouse undergoes sudden reorganization". brandeishoot.com.
  329. ^
  330. "Sustainability Accomplishments". Brandeis University. Archived from the original on 2011-06-15 . Retrieved 2009-06-08 .
  331. ^
  332. "Greening Class | Environmental Studies Program | Brandeis University". www.brandeis.edu . Retrieved 2019-05-02 .
  333. ^
  334. "Greening Class Projects 2008". Brandeis University . Retrieved 2009-06-08 . [dead link]
  335. ^
  336. Mael, Jon (12 August 2015). "Barren Brandeis rooftop transformed into feast for senses". The Boston Globe . Retrieved 2019-05-02 .
  337. ^
  338. Brandeis Emergency Medical Corps (2008). BEMCo 25th Anniversary Gala: Order of Ceremonies. Waltham, MA: Brandeis University. p. 2.
  339. ^
  340. "Article VIII: Union Accredited Organizations". Brandeis University Student Union. Archived from the original on July 3, 2008 . Retrieved 2008-09-08 .
  341. ^
  342. "Van and Shuttle Service". Department of Public Safety. Brandeis University . Retrieved 6 December 2008 .
  343. ^
  344. "553 – Roberts – Downtown Boston via Newton Corner & Central Sq., Waltham". MBTA . Retrieved 6 December 2008 .
  345. ^
  346. "Wien International Scholarship Program". Brandeis University. Archived from the original on March 19, 2012.
  • Pasternack, Susan, and Ralph Norman. From the Beginning: A Picture History of the First Four Decades of Brandeis University (1988)
  • Sachar, Abram L. Brandeis University: A Host at Last (1995), Scholarly history of the school
  • Whitfield, Stephen J., and Jonathan B. Krasner. "Jewish Liberalism and Racial Grievance in the Sixties: The Ordeal of Brandeis University," Modern Judaism, (Feb. 2015) 35#1 pp: 18–41.

200 ms 10.9% dataWrapper 180 ms 9.8% Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::getAllExpandedArguments 160 ms 8.7% Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::gsub 140 ms 7.6% Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::getExpandedArgument 120 ms 6.5% Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::callParserFunction 100 ms 5.4% (for generator) 60 ms 3.3% Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::match 60 ms 3.3% validateData 60 ms 3.3% [others] 240 ms 13.0% Number of Wikibase entities loaded: 1/400 -->


Brandeis And The History Of Transparency

“I’m proud to present the third and final part in the series of research projects from the Sunlight Foundation spring semester interns. This post is by Andrew Berger, he spent time looking into the past and following Louis Brandeis career in transparency and how it relates to the current movement.” – Nisha Thompson

By Sunlight Foundation Intern, Andrew Berger

I never really feel like I understand something unless I have a sense of its history. (I once wanted to become a historian I guess that’s just how I think.) So it’s no surprise that during my internship here at Sunlight, I found myself wanting to know more about the history of transparency. For my research, I decided to focus on efforts to increase transparency in the United States during the early twentieth century, using Louis Brandeis as a guide.

Brandeis made his famous statement that “sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants” in a 1913 Harper’s Weekly article, entitled “What Publicity Can Do.” But it was an image that had been in his mind for decades. Twenty years earlier, in a letter to his fiance, Brandeis had expressed an interest in writing a “a sort of companion piece” to his influential article on “The Right to Privacy,” but this time he would focus on “The Duty of Publicity.” He had been thinking, he wrote, “about the wickedness of people shielding wrongdoers & passing them off (or at least allowing them to pass themselves off) as honest men.” He then proposed a remedy:

If the broad light of day could be let in upon men’s actions, it would purify them as the sun disinfects.

Interestingly, at that time the word “publicity” referred both to something like what we think of as “public relations” as well to the practice of making information widely available to the public (Stoker and Rawlins, 2005). That latter definition sounds a lot like what we now mean by transparency.

Curious to know more about Brandeis’ early views, and disappointed to learn that he never wrote the article on publicity he suggested in the letter, I went looking for detailed statements he might have made on transparency from earlier in his career. I eventually found transcripts of several speeches he gave on municipal reform and good government in 1903 and 1904, the longest of which I discuss below. This speech is not just a window onto the past, but a way to see what has and what has not changed in the movement for transparency: a way to see both how far we have come and how far we still have to go.

From Brandeis’ Boston to today

Brandeis graduated from Harvard Law School in 1878 and for the first decade or so of his legal career, he does not seem to have been very heavily involved in public affairs. But in the 1890s, he began to take on cases that brought him into closer contact with the political system. One important case dealt with the reform of the Massachusetts state liquor laws, which followed the revelation that the liquor lobby was bribing state legislators. In another case, he represented a group of merchants–some of whom were already his clients from other contexts–who opposed an attempt by the Boston subway company to gain a monopoly over the city’s mass transportation system, which at the time was not entirely in public hands. He was largely successful in both cases (Strum, 17-19).

In addition to his legal work, Brandeis gave speeches on politics before business, reform, and good government groups. His April 1903 address before Boston’s Unitarian Club made several of the local papers. The Boston Herald considered the event important enough for a front page headline: “USE SEARCHLIGHT ON THE CITY HALL: Brandeis Says It Is High Time to Delve Into Corruption in City Affairs.” The article included a transcript of Brandeis’ remarks.

Here, in the course of highlighting a number of questionable expenditures the city had made in recent years, Brandeis hit on some key topics that remain at the forefront of transparency efforts today: the importance of collecting and disseminating government data, the need for open meetings, and the role of nongovernmental groups in making government more transparent.

Taking them in order, and with an eye to modern-day parallels:

Many suspected that some significant number of city employees had patronage jobs that required little work. To expose these cases, Brandeis and other reformers supported the publication of the city payroll. Brandeis also praised the new mayoral administration for issuing public reports about the city’s spending under previous administrations. But because the city’s bookkeeping records were such a mess, the value of the reports was limited: it was very difficult to compare Boston’s spending with that of other cities, or even with its own spending in earlier years. To Brandeis, this illustrated the importance of getting cities to adopt uniform accounting rules.

Today, transparency has moved beyond a focus on accounting standards and printed reports, which have become largely routine, but the principles remain quite similar. Only now the push is for online access to data and uniform data standards. Many states and other public entities have begun putting spending information online in recent years, but they have not always used the same reporting standards. These efforts are encouraging, but the adoption of agreed upon standards would make it possible to run a wider range of analyses on the data, especially across different states.

While the board of aldermen did meet in public session, it was only to receive business. Then the aldermen would carry out their discussions and vote as the “committee on public improvements”–which was essentially the same group of men, only meeting in closed session. This “desire for secrecy,” said Brandeis, was “not surprising” when you considered the “quality of the some of the acts” approved by the board.

Things have improved considerably in this area since Brandeis’ day. Many states have open meeting laws that require justifications to be given for closed meetings. Transparency efforts now focus more on getting the content of those meetings – agendas, minutes, even live or archived audio or video – online.

Finally, Brandeis declared that government action, no matter how dedicated, would never be enough to keep the public sufficiently informed: “the individual citizen must in some way collect and spread the information.” This meant not so much individuals acting alone, but nongovernmental organizations such as civic groups who provided information to voters or, even more importantly, the press. Speaking at a time when the only way to reach large audiences on a regular basis was through print, Brandeis saw the press as potentially “the greatest agency of good government”–but only “if the people are sufficiently interested to desire it.”

This raises an important question: how do the people become “sufficiently interested”? Brandeis seems to have believed in a symbiotic relationship between an informed and an engaged citizenry. The people had not yet joined the fight against corruption because they did not yet know enough about the situation. They were “ignorant of the facts–ignorant of the specific acts of misgovernment–ignorant of the low character or quality of many of the men by whom in public life they are misrepresented.”

No one, he said, could “look into the details of our city’s administration and be indifferent.” Such information would naturally lead to indignation, and out of that indignation would come a movement for “remedial action.” Publicity would overcome apathy.

The printed press, even in its current troubled state, continues to play an important role in generating interest in government and misgovernment, but now it has been joined by outside groups producing their own research and analyses. While such groups have existed for decades, the Internet has made it possible for them to reach large audiences directly – and if this audience includes reporters, and those reporters then reach even more people, so much the better.

The Web has also made possible types of information sharing and citizen engagement that did not exist even a few years ago, much less in Brandeis’ time. It has become easier for a person to turn from passive reader to active participant in politics. But it remains just as true today that a person has to become “sufficiently interested” in order to do so. To an extent, techniques like data visualizations, which really seem to have taken off in recent years, are important not just for the specific content they present, but for their potential to drive interest in government information. They are additional strategies–to go along with more traditional forms of research and reporting and advocacy–for using transparency to overcome apathy.

I would like to have a tidy conclusion here, but to be honest, I don’t think there is one. It would be nice if this were one of those histories where people in the past faced a problem–in this case, making government more transparent–and now, in the present, we have largely solved that problem. But as I hope I’ve made clear, while the details have changed, the principles, and many of the challenges, remain. In fact, as I carried out my research, I was often struck by how familiar many of the issues were, just on a different scale from today’s.

Brandeis makes a convenient guide into this past era, but he was not alone. Woodrow Wilson, for example, who would later appoint Brandeis to the Supreme Court in 1916, wrote about the need to shed light on the government all the way back in 1884. And by the 1890s several states were already experimenting with disclosure rules in order to combat corruption in campaign finance. We may not have much to learn in the way of specifics from these past transparency advocates, but we can at least gain perspective, and sometimes even inspiration, from their efforts.


The Balfour Declaration 7: Clandestine Plots Scupper A Peace Initiative

Conscious that the final resolution to the war would be critical to the Zionist claims on Palestine, their British and American leaders became increasingly involved in a secretive network aimed at influencing government policy. The three month period between April and June 1917 was peppered with urgent cables between Louis Brandeis in Washington and, Chaim Weizmann and James Rothschild in London, updating each other about privileged meetings, current opinions and actions to be taken to advance the Zionist plan. [1] Unknown to elected politicians and cabinet members in both countries, these men operated a clandestine cell of Zionist interest whose specific purpose was to normalise, validate and protect the idea of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Their targets were A.J. Balfour in Britain and President Woodrow Wilson in the United States. The British foreign secretary was known to be sympathetic the American president had yet to indicate his approval.

Even before America had formally declared war on Germany (6 April, 1917), the London cabal insisted that increased pressure be brought on the President to support the Zionist cause. Every opportunity which presented itself had to be taken. Urged by the American Ambassador at London, Walter Page, the British Government decided to send a distinguished commission to the United States on the day before America declared war on Germany. [2] America’s entry profoundly altered the ground rules because neutrality was no longer an issue for the Atlantic powers, but did not change the ultimate aim to crush Germany. Lloyd George chose the near seventy-year old Arthur Balfour, former prime minister and current foreign secretary, to lead the charm offensive to Washington.

A.J. Balfour’s mission to the United States in 1917 proved a crucial turning point. The foreign secretary had been primed by Weizmann to speak with Brandeis when he was in Washington. The two men were introduced at a reception in the White House on 23 April and Balfour was reported to have greeted the Judge with ‘You are one of the Americans I had wanted to meet.’ [3] Why, other than to gauge the strength of American-Jewish support for a homeland in Palestine? They met several times, but not in the White House. Over the following days and unknown to the President, his Supreme Court Judge and the visiting British foreign secretary had their first private breakfast together. [4] What was a on the menu for discussion was kept secret.

Balfour was in Washington to bolster the Allied cause and he and the President’s main advisor, Mandell House, specifically discussed the terms which might be imposed on Germany once it had been destroyed. On 28 April, Balfour produced a map of Europe and Asia Minor (one of the terms used to cover the Middle Eastern states largely within the Ottoman Empire) on which was traced the results of the secret treaties and agreements with Britain and France which will be examined in a later blog. They had, in Houses’ words, ‘divided up the bear-skin before the bear was dead.’ [5] Interestingly, Constantinople no longer featured as a probable Russian possession [6] but there was no indication of a Jewish Homeland in Palestine. None.

One he was informed of this, Brandeis felt obliged to intervene. He had a forty-five minute meeting with Wilson on 6 May to assure him that the establishment of a Jewish Palestine was completely in line with the President’s concept of a just settlement. The British Zionists wanted assurance that their American compatriots approved the general plan for a Jewish homeland in Palestine and would publicise their support. Pressure had to be applied on both sides of the Atlantic. On 9 May, Brandeis sent a cable to James Rothschild in which he announced the American Zionist approval for the British programme. [7] This was followed by another secret morning discussion with Balfour and on 15 May, Brandeis reported back to Weizmann and Rothschild that their objective had been successful. The precise wording in his cable demonstrated the extent to which the leading Zionists on both sides of the Atlantic were actively influencing their respective governments. Brandeis’s cable read: ‘Interviews both with President and Balfour were eminently satisfactory confirming our previous impressions as to reliable support in both directions. Presented views in line with your program [but] was assured that present circumstances did not make Government utterances desirable.’ [8] Private conversations between the President and the visiting foreign secretary were secretly passed across the Atlantic without compunction in contravention of a variety of secrecy acts. Whose national interest was being served?

Louis Brandeis continued to press Wilson for a public commitment to a Jewish homeland, but caution was advised. His cable to James Rothschild on 23 May stated that Balfour told him: ‘if we exercised patience and allowed events to take their natural course, we would obtain more’. According to Brandeis, President Wilson was reluctant to make a public declaration because the United States was not at war with Turkey. So much for the notion that Judge Brandeis limited his activities to matters of law. His secret collusion with British Zionists should have raised concerns about a conflict of interest but that paled into insignificance when compared with his involvement in destroying a clandestine American peace-mission to Turkey.

In early June 1917 an extremely concerned Louis Brandeis made an urgent call to London. The Zionist plans were suddenly threatened by an unexpected and unwelcome intervention about which none of them had the slightest warning. Brandeis discovered that a secret American delegation, headed by the former United States Ambassador at Constantinople, Henry Morgenthau, was on its way to Switzerland. Its purpose was to convince Turkey to break away from the German-Austrian alliance, an action which would have radically altered the geo-political situation when the war ended. Indeed, if successful, it would have shortened the war.

Former ambassador Morgenthau believed that a combination of German domination and war famine was making life unbearable in Turkey. Even the Young Turks had become ‘heartily sick of their German masters’ [9] Henry Morgenthau thought that he understood the Turkish mind. His plan was to go to Switzerland to meet former members of the Ottoman cabinet and offer generous peace terms and ‘any other means’ (by that he meant bribes) to encourage them to abandon their allies. Initially Robert Lansing the US secretary of state, talked over the proposal with Arthur Balfour. The British foreign secretary suggested that since Switzerland was ridden with spies, Morgenthau should use Egypt as a base… as if Egypt wasn’t riddled with spies? It afforded the very plausible excuse that the American delegation was concerned with the condition of Jews in Palestine. Lansing agreed and an American Zionist, Felix Frankfurter, was added to the official delegation. One flaw surfaced almost immediately after Morgenthau set off for Europe. The mission had been sanctioned without due consideration to its possible consequences for Zionism.

Judge Louis Brandeis learned about the venture after the Americans had departed for a rendezvous with their Allied compatriots in Europe. [10] He immediately understood the mortal danger which any such rapprochement with the Turks would bring to the Zionist ambitions. Brandeis alerted Chaim Weizmann. They both realised that these negotiations could completely undermine their carefully constructed plans. In June 1917 there was no Jewish homeland. The very concept was at best paper-talk and had yet to be formally accepted by any of the major powers. A generous settlement for the Turks which might have left Palestine and Arabia intact, would have destroyed the Zionist ambitions before the world war had ended.

In London, Weizmann’s contacts at the foreign office confirmed Brandeis’s anxiety. He learned that the proposed British contingent which was scheduled to join Morgenthau contained envoys whom he did not consider as ‘proper persons’ for such a mission. [11] Since when did unelected observers make decisions on who was or was not a ‘proper person’ to undertake a foreign office assignment? Weizmann turned to C.P. Scott his Manchester journalist friend, and within a matter of days was invited to speak behind closed doors with foreign secretary Balfour, recently returned from Washington.

What emerged was an astonishing acknowledgement of Zionist complicity in scuttling the American mission. In complete secrecy, Balfour appointed Chaim Weizmann as the British representative to meet Morgenthau. Not a career diplomat. Not a Jewish member of the House of Lords or Commons. He gave the task to a ‘proper person’. The leader of the Zionist movement in Britain, Chaim Weizmann, was formally appointed by the foreign office as Britain’s representative to a secret mission which, had it been allowed to progress unmolested, could radically have shortened the war. Weizmann was given a formidable set of credentials, his own intelligence officer and the responsibility to stop Henry Morgenthau in his tracks. [12]

Chaim Weizmann grasped the opportunity. The Secret Elite chose to use him for their own ends. Their ultimate plan not only for Palestine, but the entire Middle East, would have been seriously compromised had Morgenthau successfully disengaged Turkey from the war. For the Zionists it was imperative that their ambition for a homeland in Palestine was approved by one of the great Powers before the fighting ceased. Chaim Weizmann, accompanied by Sir Ronald Graham [13] and Lord Walter Rothschild met Balfour again. They put one condition on the table. The time had come for a definitive declaration of support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This had to be acknowledged – urgently, in case an unexpected peace closed down the opportunity. Balfour agreed. In fact he did more than agree. He asked Chaim Weizmann to submit a form of words that would satisfy the Zionist aspiration, and promised to take it to Lloyd George’s War Cabinet. [14] Here was the golden chance which could not be missed. This was the starting point for the formal declaration which would be endorsed by the war cabinet and called The Balfour Declaration.

Behind the scenes in America, Louis Brandeis succeeded in completely overturning the original position held by Robert Lansing at the Department of State. The plan which had been given official sanction had to be scuppered. On 25 June, while Morgenthau was en-route across the Atlantic on the SS Buenos Aires, an urgent telegram was sent from Washington to Balfour alerting the British to Morgenthau’s arrival in Europe. Lansing specifically stated that ‘it is considerably important that ‘Chaim Weizmann meet Mr Morgenthau at Gibraltar’. [15] How extraordinary. Secretary Lansing requested that his own former ambassador should meet Chaim Weizmann, the leader of the British Zionists before proceeding further. On the same day he instructed the American Ambassador (Willard) at Madrid to ensure that, as soon as he landed, Morgenthau fully understood that he was ordered to go to Gibraltar to meet Weizmann. This instruction was to be sent by ‘special red code strictly confidential’ [16] Who was in charge of American foreign policy, Lansing or Brandeis? No matter. They certainly meant to stop Morganthau.

While the choice of Weizmann as the main British negotiator was inspired, it was little wonder that his involvement, and indeed the whole mission, was a closely guarded secret. The Americans were halted in Gibraltar, ostensibly to agree how the Turks might be approached. With all the weight and authority of his Zionist credentials, Chaim Weizmann pressed Morgenthau on his intentions. Why did he imagine that the Zionist organisations on either side of the Atlantic supported his actions? Did he realise that his proposals would compromise everything that Jewish organisations had been working towards? Realising what he was up against, Morgenthau abandoned the mission within two days of Weizmann’s onslaught. He back-tracked to the comfort of Biarritz and left France on 12 July without informing Ambassador Willard of his future plans. [17]

His ego seriously dented, Morgenthau dispatched his own heart-felt complaint to Washington. Given the ease with which diplomatic telegrams could be intercepted, the Americans were appalled. He received a stinging rebuke from Lansing’s office which was as much for international consumption as it was for Morgenthau’s. The telegram read: ‘Department surprised and disturbed that your text seems to indicate you have been authorised to enter into negotiations which would lead to a separate peace with Turkey… Final instructions were to deal solely with the conditions of Jews in Palestine…under no circumstances confer, discuss or carry messages about internal situation in Turkey or a separate peace.’ [18] The aims of the Secret Elite and the political Zionist organisation began to move in tandem. Consider carefully what had happened.

Brandeis had interfered directly with the US State Department policy. Furthermore, he did not hesitate to pass secret information to Chaim Weizmann and James Rothschild in London so that Morgenthau’s plans would be thwarted, nominally by the British government. Weizmann, in turn, was ushered in as the foreign office solution. Though by 1917 he was a naturalised British citizen, Chaim Weizmann was no diplomat or civil servant. He was a Zealot for an unbending cause. By pitting a most able and skilled Jewish negotiator against a moderate (at best) American-Jewish diplomat, the Secret Elite approved an inspired appointment. Weizmann crushed Morgenthau with deep-felt passion. At an even deeper level of conspiracy Brandeis had nailed his colours, not to Old Glory, but to the Zionist flag borne by Chaim Weizmann and James Rothschild.

Weizmann the zealot lived for one purpose in 1917. His determination was absolute. He wrote to Philip Kerr, a Milner protege and one of Lloyd George’s ‘secretaries’: ‘Some Jews and non-Jews do not seem to realise one fundamental fact, that whatever happens we will get to Palestine.’ [19] And what of Louis Brandeis? He chose to promote and protect the Zionist vision of a Jewish homeland in Palestine in favour of an action which could well have ended the war before American troops landed in Europe. American lives or a Jewish homeland in Palestine? Did Louis Brandeis ever consider that thought?


The legacy of Louis Brandeis, 100 years after his historic nomination

It was a simple form letter that President Woodrow Wilson filled out and sent to the United States Senate. “To the Senate of the United States: I nominate Louis D. Brandeis of Massachusetts to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, vice Joseph Rucker Lamar, deceased.” He signed it in his distinctive hand, and at the bottom left-hand corner, it read: “The White House, Washington, 28 January 1916.”

In nominating Louis Dembitz Brandeis to replace the deceased Associate Justice Joseph Rucker Lamar of Georgia (who had died on Jan. 2, 1916), President Woodrow Wilson ignited a firestorm of controversy.

The justice-designate had an impressive background and record. He was a famous lawyer. He was an advisor and supporter of the president who, when as governor of New Jersey, ran for and won the office he now held. The Brandeis worldview was simple: he was an avowed enemy of those who looked upon the common people with distaste and disdain, even though he himself was comfortably well-off. He placed himself on the side of those who were without power and influence he believed that the poor, the immigrant and the downtrodden had rights that deserved to be respected. And he also believed that women had rights, too. He was the first to explain what was to become known as the “right to privacy.” He was a deeply learned man who had a social conscience and believed in the betterment of society.

He had entered Harvard Law School at the age of 18, and when he graduated in 1877, he had earned the highest honors in the law school’s history. (What made this unusual was that he achieved this distinction without ever having gone to college or university. Though he hadn’t reached the required age—21—for graduation, Harvard Corporation passed a resolution allowing him to receive his law degree.) And from there, his work and tireless efforts on behalf of human and civil rights earned him the title, “The People’s Lawyer.”

He lived in a time of foment and change he lived in the “Progressive Era” and the term adequately described him. He fought against unjust laws and discrimination. He passionately believed in free speech at the same time, he was equally passionate about fairness, whether it involved banking or insurance, wages and labor regulations, and of monopolies of any kind. In time, he would become renowned for the “Brandeis Brief,” whereby his marshalling of facts, reason and common sense in the service of his beliefs and his clients would come to serve as a model for future Supreme Court presentations. He was a model of judicial liberalism, a liberalism that comprised of both the theoretical with the practical. For Louis Brandeis, both were essential, not only in life, both also in law.

But none of that mattered. The only thing that mattered was the fact that he was Jewish.

The man who became Justice Brandeis was born on the eve of the American Civil War, on Nov. 13, 1856. in Louisville, Ky. His lineage was of German Jews who had settled in a part of Kentucky that had a thriving Jewish community. Indeed, when the first Jewish congregation was created—in 1842—it was called Adath Israel and it was regarded by the Yiddish poet Israel Jacob Schwartz (a man who had arrived in New York from Lithuania and settled in Kentucky) as the “Jerusalem of the American South.” His father was a successful grain merchant and the family was upper class. But what was notable about young Louis was his love of learning. It was that love of learning that was to shape the man he was to become and the country he helped to create.

It is one of the ironies of history that a hundred years ago, a gifted man such as Louis Brandeis would be judged deficient because he was a son of immigrants and a member of a different faith. His was just another example of how in American history, one’s background and faith was cause to be considered suspect and arouse suspicion and distrust. Powerful forces were arrayed against him, from those in business, politics, and even his own legal profession. (In that category, he would be firmly opposed by a former president who himself would later become a Chief Justice—and colleague—William Howard Taft. And in a more personal irony—even some of his coreligionists were against him.) As America pointed out at the time, racism was “unhappily interjected” into the nomination proceedings (Chronicles, 2/5/1916). Bigotry was arrayed against Louis Brandeis and in his time he had to silently bear it in order to overcome it.

What would he think now, if he were to peer from atop that Supreme Court bench he had ascended to, and scan all those years of the past century since? He would see much that much has improved as far as civil rights and civil liberties are concerned. But he would also recognize that those achievements have become somewhat illusory for he would realize that bigotry that plagued his day still exists, that immigrants and people of other faiths are still considered suspect and viewed with fear and scorn. And, in a presidential election year, he would see a time of momentous challenges, changes, worries, threats and scapegoating, like the presidential election year of his time when he was nominated for a supreme judicial post. And if he pondered it all from that bench, he might sadly conclude that not much has changed.

Louis Brandeis was a realist, of course. For he said: “Behind every argument is someone’s ignorance.” And, eerily, for our times: “We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.” But he was also an idealist: “If we would guide by the light of reason, we must let our minds be bold.” And to him, “the most important political office is that of the private citizen.”

He is remembered, quite rightly, for his enumeration of the belief in the “right to privacy.” He may well have been one of the very first to advocate such a belief. But on this 100th anniversary of his appointment to the Supreme Court, it may be better to recall the man himself, who was a son of immigrants and a member of a faith and heritage that was not adequately understood or appreciated. He stands as an example for the immigrant of today, especially for one of a different faith. He knew who he was and he didn’t let the limitations of others stop him from offering his services for the betterment of his fellow citizens. We must remember him for something more important and more personal: “the right to be.” That is his true legacy.


A History Of Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings

The U.S. Senate didn't begin holding confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominees until 1916. Legal historian Scot Powe tells NPR's Guy Raz about what triggered the first hearing: Woodrow Wilson's controversial nomination of Louis Brandeis. Powe traces the history of such hearings.

Al Franken has gone to great lengths lately to be unfunny, but thankfully, Minnesota's other senator, Amy Klobuchar, hasn't. In a few minutes, we'll hear from the woman dubbed the funniest U.S. senator. Amy Klobuchar is also on the Judiciary Committee with Al Franken.

First though, a little historical perspective. If some senators decide to turn up the heat this week, Judge Sotomayor might wish she'd been nominated before 1916. That was the year of the first confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court justice. Until that point, the Senate simply voted yay or nay.

Then in 1916, President Woodrow Wilson picked his aide Louis Brandeis for a spot on the court.

Lucas Powe, a professor of law and government at the University of Texas, explains what happened next.

Professor LUCAS POWE (Law and Government, University of Texas Author, "The Supreme Court and the American Elite, 1789-2008"): Brandeis was a spectacularly controversial nomination. First, he was the first Jew ever to be nominated for the court, and there was blatant anti-Semitism there.

Second, he'd been a very successful lawyer. And after he got really rich, he became what seems to be the first public-interest lawyer in American history, and he started to take on corporations that formerly he would have been taking money from as their advocate, and thus he made a lot of enemies. And former President Taft, Harvard President Lowell, former Attorney General Wickersham, former Secretary of State Elihu Root and several former presidents of the American Bar Association all opposed his nomination.

RAZ: So it was so controversial, they essentially had to have hearings.

Prof. POWE: Yes, they had to have hearings. And it was four months from President Wilson's nomination until the final vote on Brandeis which was, for that era, an incredible amount of time.

RAZ: And so, I mean, what happens, or did Lewis Brandeis sort of had to show up every day and testify at the hearings?

Prof. POWE: No, Brandeis did not attend his hearings at all. There were people supporting him and obviously people opposing him.

RAZ: So when did nominees actually start appearing at their own confirmation hearings?

Prof. POWE: The first nominee to do so was Felix Frankfurter in 1939. And Frankfurter, like Brandeis, was Jewish and Frankfurter, like Brandeis, was a controversial appointment, especially for his defense of Sacco and Vanzetti during the '20s.

Prof. POWE: Yes. And thus, the Senate wanted hearings and Frankfurter attended but took the not surprising position that his public record spoke for itself, and he wasn't going to add a whit to it.

RAZ: So essentially, he just came out there and said that?

RAZ: I mean, he said nothing else?

Prof. POWE: That's right. He said it would be inappropriate for him to add or subtract from his lengthy public record.

RAZ: They didn't ask him any questions?

Prof. POWE: They couldn't get any answers.

RAZ: And that was it? And what was the reaction by the members of the Judiciary Committee?

Prof. POWE: They confirmed him.

RAZ: So, at what point did you actually have this process where the nominee would come and sit down and really start to answer the questions?

Prof. POWE: I think the turning point was Potter Stewart's nomination in 1959. By that time, southern Democrats were fully hostile to the Supreme Court because of its desegregation decisions, and conservative Republicans were worried about the Supreme Court over national security issues, and Stewart got a fair grilling. But like other nominees, he didn't provide them any answers.

RAZ: When you say he didn't provide them any answers, he answered their questions, but they weren't particularly substantive?

Prof. POWE: That's right. He wouldn't give them the information they were looking for.

RAZ: Professor Powe, nowadays it seems, you know, if you make it to the confirmation stage, you're pretty much in. Of course, there was one notable exception in the last 30 years, and that was Judge Bork. Can we really learn anything about these nominees during this process?

Prof. POWE: I don't think that we do. We certainly learn that they are willing to obfuscate, because now we seem to give points to the nominee for the ability to avoid answering the questions being asked.

Take Justice Scalia. When he was questioned by the senators, one senator asked him: Do you consider Marbury versus Madison settled law? And of course, it's been settled law since it came down in 1803, and Justice Scalia refused to answer on the grounds that the question might come before him as a justice.

A little later, both Justice Souter and Justice Ginsburg were asked whether the Korean War was a war, and both of them declined to answer.

RAZ: Professor Powe, will you be watching the Sotomayor hearings?

Prof. POWE: If it's a 106 in Austin, I certainly will.

RAZ: Lucas Powe is a professor of law and government at the University of Texas in Austin. His latest book is called "The Supreme Court and the American Elite, 1789-2008."

Professor Powe, thanks for helping us out.

Prof. POWE: Thank you very much.

Copyright © 2009 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR&rsquos programming is the audio record.


More Comments:

David W. Levy - 7/2/2010

I read Rosen's fine review of Melvin Urofsky's new biography of Louis Brandeis with pleasure, and I heartily agree with his high opinion of Brandeis and of Urofsky's book. On one point, however, I would like to register a small comment. Rosen begins the review by implying that Herbert Croly and Willard Straight were unwilling to publish, in THE NEW REPUBLIC, a chart showing the close social and economic ties of Brandeis's Boston opponents. And although Rosen does acknowledge that the magazine warmly supported the Brandeis confirmation, his comments leave the unfortunate impression that the journal was unwilling or afraid to expose the connections which that famous chart exposed.
It is true that the editors did not print the chart itself. But they did summarize, in considerable detail, its contents. In a March 11, 1916 editorial, written at the height of the Brandeis confirmation hearings, the editors (probably Walter Lippmann) published an analysis of "the fifty-one signers of the petition opposing Mr. Brandeis's confirmation." "Among the petitioners," the editorial charges, "there were a few 'outsiders,'" but "the overwhelming majority were men more closely connected with one another by economic, social, and family ties than existed in the case of any other similar community in the country. For the most part they transact the same kind of business in the same neighborhood they belong to the same clubs they are bound together by a most complicated system of relationships by blood and marriage. They form an essentially ingrowing community. Ordinarily a community of this kind can lead its own exclusive life without provoking criticism but when it acts aggressively in public practically as a unit, its members challenge public attention and should not resent public scrutiny. The contra-Brandeis petitioners started on a deadly errand. They undertook to destroy the reputation of a man, to prevent a public servant from using his great abilities to the best public advantge. They have exhibited only their own disqualification to draw an indictment."
Again, I appreciated Rosen's review and agree with what he says both about Brandeis and about Urofsky's treatment. But I would regret leaving the impression that Croly and THE NEW REPUBLIC were too timid or cowardly to deal with the fact that Brandeis's Boston opponents constituted an inbred and self-interested aristocracy.


Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis Quotes

Being a Supreme Court Justice of the United States, these Louis D Brandeis quotes are well related to the law firms and cases. Below are the best Louis D Brandeis quotes.

1."Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers."

-Louis Brandeis, 'Olmstead v. United States quotes., 277 U.S. 438 (1928) (dissenting)'.

2." America has believed that in differentiation, not in uniformity, lies the path of progress. It acted on this belief it has advanced human happiness, and it has prospered."

3."If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable."

4."We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both."

5." For my tax evasion, I should be punished. For my tax avoidance, I should be commended. The tragedy of life today is that so few people know that the free bridge even exists."

6."Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent."

7."The so-called control of life insurance companies by policy-holders through mutualization is a farce” and “its only result is to keep in office a self-constituted, self-perpetuating management."

8."If we would guide by the light of reason we must let our minds be bold."

9."If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law it invites every man to become a law unto himself it invites anarchy."

10."Behind every argument is someone's ignorance."

11."If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you."

12."The organisation can never be a substitute for initiative and judgement."

13."If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."

-Louis D Brandeis, 'Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)'.

14."The general rule of law is, that the noblest of human productions - knowledge, truths ascertained, conceptions, and ideas - become, after voluntary communication to others, free as the air to common use."

15."Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears."

16."Those who won our independence. valued liberty as an end and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty."


The Liberalism of Louis D. Brandeis:The Father of the New Deal

Reformer, corporation lawyer, Zionist, Justice of the Supreme Court, and one of the most outstanding liberals of his generation, Louis D. Brandeis (1856-1941) lived in the center of the public stage for decades. Yet it was quite generally recognized that the particular quality of his personality and thought escaped the customary labels. It has been a continuing challenge to try to discover the hidden springs of his career, and the essential philosophy of the man many have called the father of the New Deal. Solomon F. Bloom, who offers this latest appraisal, is professor of history at Brooklyn College and has been a frequent contributor to COMMENTARY.

Number has always had a fascination for man. Pythagoras said all things were numbers and proceeded to reduce the world to arithmetical arrangements. Many a mystic has tried to forge a numerical key to the mystery of the universe. Quite paradoxically, a certain class of rugged men who pride themselves on their down-to-earth common sense are also subject to this high conceit. Indeed, a whole branch of liberal reform&mdashthough, I hasten to add, by no means traditional liberalism in general&mdashhas been persuaded that social problems may be solved by a kind of dead reckoning. The most notable representative of this school of thought, the English Utilitarian Jeremy Bentham, went to the length of computing happiness itself. He devised a &ldquocalculus of felicity,&rdquo in which constituent joys and countervailing sorrows could be added, subtracted, and multiplied, and a reliable balance struck.

The attraction that number has for mystics shows that yielding to it is not always the mark of a superficial heart. Among reforming economists and politicians, the devotees of number have often been men particularly troubled by the fact of misery and injustice. Louis D. Brandeis, reformer, lawyer, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, and one of the most influential liberals of the last generation, was such a devotee.

Brandeis&rsquo extraordinary career ranged widely and colorfully from a long and clever campaign against the financial barons, a war on monopoly and &ldquobigness,&rdquo staunch pioneering of social legislation, to outstanding contributions to the progressive movements that bear the names of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson and might almost as justly bear his own, and finally to a climax of Zionist and judicial leadership.

But while his career has been assessed 1 with some adequacy, the man himself has not. He was hardly, to be sure, an easy man to know. A certain inscrutability hung about him. His enemies called it hauteur and even contempt for his fellow-men, and his friends called it reserve and insistence on privacy. Both sensed a distance. Mason observes that even those who came to know him well &ldquodiscovered an inner sphere of personality vigilantly guarded, which few if any could penetrate thinking they were close to him, they soon found as they approached the inner man they could go no further.&rdquo Justice Learned Hand speaks of Brandeis&rsquo &ldquofiery nature&rdquo but adds that for the most part the fire lay &ldquoburied beneath an iron control.&rdquo

If Brandeis possessed a fundamental outlook that underlay all others he was not aware of it himself. &ldquoI have no general philosophy,&rdquo he would say. &ldquoAll my life I have thought only in connection with the facts that came before me. . . . We need not so much reason as to see and understand facts and conditions.&rdquo He seemed to doubt the value of a philosophy altogether. &ldquoI think reason which leaps far ahead does very little in life.&rdquo Or, &ldquosometimes it is. better not to try to see the unknowable future.&rdquo Style, which so frequently gives away the man, effectively concealed Brandeis. He wrote a dry, factual, and even uncouth prose stripped of all sinuosity, allusion, and penumbra. And he shut the last door of self-betrayal by avoiding discussions of philosophical or religious matters.

We may take it perhaps that Brandeis was very much a man of this world, the kind of man who, as Lief notices, spurns metaphysics. But if we cannot reach the inmost source of his drive or touch the mainspring of his character, we have at least the one clue that practical men most often leave behind them: their modus operandi. If we follow this clue we may strike a distinguishing characteristic, not of Brandeis alone, but of the whole school of which he was a notable figure. And in a day that cries out for a reappraisal of liberalism, it is well to refresh our view of one of its most fruitful branches.

Speaking culturally, Brandeis&rsquo modus operandi was an inheritance. His family belonged to that sizable group of middle-class immigrants who flocked to the United States from Germany and Austria a century ago and played a considerable role in the commercial upbuilding of the mid-West and the Southern borderland as well as the East. A strain of cautious economy ran through the breed. The story is told that in his high-school club, young Brandeis paid the most particular attention to the treasurer&rsquos accounts. From the beginning and throughout, he showed a high aptitude for mathematics, or, I should rather say, for practical figures. De Haas recalled that even in later life Brandeis could recite prices of staple commodities and the important stock exchange listings for decades.

This trait made itself felt in his law work. Brandeis had hesitated but briefly before rejecting the career of teaching and scholarship that his unique record at Harvard Law School suggested. &ldquoThe love of a struggle and a little ambition is given [to my sons] as their maternal inheritance,&rdquo wrote Adolph Brandeis, who sensed his son&rsquos turbulent energy and knew he wanted to try his &ldquoskill tilting the world.&rdquo Indeed, Louis was restless and battle-hungry, and the &ldquowrangling of the bar&rdquo attracted him. He was passionately intent to succeed and to distinguish himself in no mean measure. And in Boston of the 80&rsquos success meant not only ample riches but the prestige that comes from an unusual public career and social influence.

The stakes were high and the costs quite inflationary. Only his keener and swifter abilities distinguished young Brandeis from the ordinary practitioner at the bar. The client always came first, and truth and justice were left to shift for themselves. I am afraid that his treatment of his juniors early in the career of his law firm in Boston was autocratic, and his sudden defense of monopoly during his triple connection with the United Shoe Machinery Company as investor, director, and counsel, was unconscionable. Brandeis insisted for a long time that his was a &ldquogood&rdquo monopoly. Like all men who stamp their feet in self-conscious assertion of power he was not spared the price of lapses from consistency and good taste.

Brandeis specialized in commercial and corporation practice and planned his success with the care of a strategist. He drew up &ldquoincredibly long lists of people he had met, who had introduced them to him, where he had met them, and, occasionally, what they were like.&rdquo &ldquoCultivate the society of men&mdashparticularly men of affairs,&rdquo this Poor Richard advised a younger colleague. &ldquoLose no opportunity of becoming acquainted with men, of learning to feel instinctively their motivation, of familiarizing yourself with their personal and business habits use your abilities in making opportunities to do this. . . . Impress them with your superior knowledge.&rdquo In these early years Brandeis spoke habitually as a conscious representative of capitalism. In opposing an unfair franchise for the Boston Elevated Railway Company in 1897, he remarked that it would result &ldquoin great injustice to the people of Massachusetts, and eventually great injustice to the capitalist classes whom you [the state legislators] are now representing, and with whom I, as well as you, are in close connection.&rdquo

More distinctive of Brandeis was his inevitable prescience in mastering the methods and techniques of business. Louis E. Kirstein observed that he was a better businessman than most of his business clients. He mastered&mdashand this was much to his taste as well as quite original&mdashbookkeeping and accounting. &ldquoKnow bookkeeping, the universal language of business,&rdquo he counseled, echoing, in his own way, Marx&rsquos description of that science as &ldquothe control and abstract joinder of the process of production.&rdquo Bentham, meet Hegel. . . . And, looking beyond Bentham to Turgot, Brandeis descended to the simplification: &ldquoAccountancy&mdashthat is government.&rdquo

An important practice quickly brought him the first desideratum of success. By 1907 he had amassed his first million dollars, and by 1916, when he was appointed to the highest bench in the country, he had amassed his second. He made only &ldquoabsolutely safe investments intended to be permanent and yielding a low rate of return,&rdquo in the best railroad, utility, municipal, and government bonds. Imperceptibly, by the time of his death, the estate surpassed the third million.

But his consumption was conspicuously frugal. Although his income over many decades hovered around $100,000 a year, he lived on one-tenth of it. His summer home on Cape Cod was valued at $9,450. &ldquoBuy nothing that is not irresistibly handsome,&rdquo he advised with great good sense, and added: &ldquoBuy nothing which your grandchildren cannot use.&rdquo His puritanism was disturbed by the marble ostentation of the new Supreme Court building in Washington. Lief reports that he would tear the folded court stationery in half and use only one piece at a time. Between 1905 and 1939 he gave to Jewish charities and to Zionism more than $600,000 another half million to friends and relations most of his estate went to Zionism and other public causes. Yet the psychological motif of his wealth was not disbursement. &ldquoThe great happiness in life,&rdquo he said, &ldquois not to donate, but to serve.&rdquo Mason comments that &ldquoit was his time and his brains&mdashthe harder gifts&mdashthat he gave to good causes rather than his cash.&rdquo

It was hardly his fault, then, but merely the effect of a soundly budgeted independence that he died a multi-millionaire. It is to underline his conception of independence&mdasha conception that speaks volumes for his time and place&mdashthat I have mentioned these figures. &ldquoI don&rsquot want money or property most. I want to be free.&rdquo And he measured freedom by the highest standards available he would be no less free than the richest. Lief happily remarks that Brandeis wanted &ldquoa million-dollar grip on life.&rdquo

Indeed, to the type of liberalism that Brandeis represented, the most valuable treasure was not money but time, time for effort. If he invested safely it was so he would not have to &ldquotake time off thinking about it.&rdquo He counted it as his greatest luxury to be able to &ldquoinvest&rdquo his &ldquosurplus effort&rdquo&mdashso he put it, in characteristic phrasing&mdashin public causes, without compensation. We are in the presence here of Sir Isaac Newton&rsquos account of time as an external reality with an existence of its own, an &ldquoabsolute, free, and mathematical value.&rdquo In this old psychology, time is something that we &ldquohave&rdquo and &ldquoown.&rdquo It is our greatest calculable treasure. The proper allocation and exploitation of time becomes the first premise of a rewarding life. Brandeis&rsquo day &ldquoran according to steady routine, in which hours, even minutes, were carefully scheduled,&rdquo writes Mason. &ldquoBy planning, personal efficiency could be doubled or trebled. &lsquoBetween what we do and what we are capable of doing there is a difference of 100 per cent,&rsquo he maintained.&rdquo The whole year was scheduled: &ldquoI soon learned I could do twelve months&rsquo work in eleven but not in twelve.&rdquo If he did not feel fit, he did not trust his judgment! We are reminded of another distinguished liberal, the British Prime Minister, William E. Gladstone, who was careful to use the minutest interstices of leisure&mdashhe always carried a classic in his pocket as insurance against the unexpected idle moment&mdashand who promised his son that &ldquothe thrift of time&rdquo would yield him a &ldquousury of profit.&rdquo The thrift of time, and the eye to figures, not to mention a fertile mental mechanism, brought Brandeis a large harvest. Legal briefs based on painstaking analysis of economic facts and social conditions rather than on musty legal precedent became, as everyone knows, Brandeis&rsquo peculiar and creative contribution to his craft. On such issues, for example, as shorter hours or night work for women, which he fought before state and federal courts, he would submit a few pages of law and several hundred of the &ldquoworld&rsquos experience&rdquo with the moral, physiological, and social effects of overwork. The &ldquoexperience&rdquo consisted of thousands of abstracts and summaries of investigations, factory inspectors&rsquo reports, medical treatises, and social studies in every country and in every language. The courts finally yielded, reluctantly, to his novel &ldquoargument&rdquo: the United States Supreme Court declared&mdashwith what in any field but the law would be regarded as an enormity of naivety&mdashthat it would take &ldquoofficial cognizance of all matters of general knowledge.&rdquo

In the long struggle with the then powerful New Haven Railroad and with J. P. Morgan, who tried to monopolize the rails of New England, the accountant&rsquos eye spied the enemy&rsquos Achilles&rsquo heel. It appears that the railroad&rsquos financial statement for 1907 was cast in heterodox form: the item of maintenance was omitted from the debit side and charged to profit and loss, instead of to operating expenses as sound bookkeeping required. The New Haven paid its traditional eight per cent, but had the accounts been done properly they would have shown that the profits were more than a million dollars short of the sum needed for that vainglorious dividend. Brandeis explained this in a loud voice, but the financial manipulators already knew it and the investors trusted them. A few years later the railroad was very bankrupt and the bankers who had mulcted it quite superfluously solvent. &ldquoMy special field of knowledge,&rdquo remarked Brandeis, &ldquois figures.&rdquo

Again, his deftest stroke in the famous Taft-Ballinger-Pinchot controversy over the conservation of natural resources was strikingly arithmetical, or rather chronometric. President Taft had dismissed a critic from the public service and cited a report by Attorney General Wickersham in justification. It escaped all eyes but Brandeis&rsquo that two dates mentioned by the President made it appear that Wickersham had turned out a report of half a million words in a week. Mason remarks coyly that &ldquoBrandeis knew only one man who could have done that job in that time, and his name was not Wickersham.&rdquo By studying his movements for that week, consulting railroad time tables and newspaper accounts, Brandeis demonstrated that Wickersham could not have done it and so exposed the dismissal as political.

Brandies&rsquo interest in reform developed Rather slowly. His early excursions in this field were eminently respectable and innocuous&mdashliquor, civil service, free trade. The turn apparently began about 1890, when he married into the liberal-minded Goldmark family and reacted to the shock of the Homestead steel strike and the ruthless violence perpetrated on the workers. Certainly he showed a general restlessness. His successes in the law came ever easier perhaps he craved fiercer contentions and worthier contenders. The age was breeding business Goliaths and swashbucklers, proud magnates who needed humbling. He plunged into combat with the strongest figures of his time.

Here, too, he showed a strong predisposition for order and reckoning. Hence his advocacy of scientific management. The problems business had created&mdashand few men had been so effective in exposing them&mdashbusiness itself could mend by rationalizing itself. He took the engineer&rsquos view of business as &ldquoan intricate machine.&rdquo The goddess of reason revenged itself. Everywhere else the man of common sense, Brandeis became here the high rationalist. &ldquoThe distinction between the mechanic and the engineer is that the mechanic cuts and tries and works by formula based on empiricism the engineer calculates and plans with absolute certainty of the accomplishment of the final result in accordance with his plans which are based ultimately on fundamental truths and natural science.&rdquo

Brandeis aroused enormous interest in scientific management when he brought the testimony of industrial engineers before the Interstate Commerce Commission to support his contention that the railroads could save a million dollars a day by applying the methods devised by Frederick W. Taylor for time and motion studies and analysis of unit costs. The savings, incidentally, would make unnecessary the higher rates the railroads were asking for. His enthusiasm was aflame, he piled argument on argument, even pointing to the value of efficient preparation in Prussia&rsquos victory over France in 1871 and Japan&rsquos over Russia in 1904.

&ldquoTaylorism&rdquo was of course anathema to labor leaders and radicals, who saw in it only a highfalutin expression for murderous sweating and speed-up. But Brandeis insisted that &ldquowhen Taylor, with infinite patience and genius, discovered the laws by which a given quantity of pig iron might be loaded into a car . . . he was protecting his workmen, not exhausting them.&rdquo The introduction of such methods offered to labor its &ldquogreatest opportunity.&rdquo A more scientific organization of production would not only eliminate waste and increase profits, making possible higher wages, but would stimulate worker-management cooperation. It would raise morale by emphasizing workmanlike achievement. &ldquoMen would be led, not driven.&rdquo

Brandies had made a useful suggestion and betrayed a fundamental blindness. He sensed correctly that labor and radical leadership had shown too little concern with the processes of production. It is only lately that the more advanced unions have begun to study and recommend more efficient methods in their industries. Marxism itself was long guilty of the same neglect. But management and ownership, which stood closer to the controls, were much more to blame for waste and inefficiency. This Brandeis of course perceived, yet his solution implied that management would not only show a greater intelligence but might also subordinate profit-mindedness to the objective demands of scientific production. Believing anyway in &ldquobetterment within the broad lines of existing institutions,&rdquo he proposed with fetching simplicity that business become a liberal profession, governed by recognized ideals and standards, like medicine, or, say, the younger calling, agronomy.

In Business&mdashA Profession, a commencement oration at Brown University in 1912, Brandeis soared to the hope that business&mdashand under that term he included manufacturing, transportation, and finance as well as merchandising&mdashshould require a preliminary intellectual training, dedicate itself to altruistic service, pool the best techniques and &ldquosecrets,&rdquo and encourage excellent performance for its own sake. He assured the ambitious that this would still leave room for distinction, and for unusual returns, just as was the case in other professions. Brandeis did nothing by halves. He went on to proclaim that as the new profession developed, &ldquothe great industrial and social problems expressed in the present social unrest will one by one find solution.&rdquo No wonder he remarked that &ldquobusiness is one of the noblest and most promising of all professions.&rdquo

How ridiculous was the expectation that schools of business might help to solve the economic crisis&mdashfor that was what his suggestion boiled down to&mdashbecame clear even to business economists. In introducing the second edition of Business&mdashA Profession, Professor James C. Bonbright of the School of Business of Columbia University observed that between the First World War end the fateful year of 1929, such schools had increased in number, and business morality had deteriorated.

Brandeis&rsquo opposition to big business derived from a certain view of human nature and an ingrained sense of the proportion of things. &ldquoNobody can look after a business as well as the owner, but as a business grows in size the man at the controls has a diminishing knowledge of the facts&rdquo and therefore little basis for judgment. Ability is rare and so is self-knowledge. &ldquoFew men are bad, but many are weak.&rdquo If we are to cut our coat to human cloth, we must keep the unit of enterprise small. In this rather pessimistic view, Brandeis was closer to Bentham than to the French Revolutionary liberals, whose faith in humanity was sanguine and adventurous. An underlying shadow of distrust helps to explain the curious paradox that the economic liberal school, which places an extreme stress upon individual freedom in trade, industry, and society, yet implies a need for external organization or arrangement&mdashnot necessarily political&mdashwhich might discipline men and protect them from their own weaknesses and passions. Brandeis put it strikingly, even if somewhat condescendingly, when he said that &ldquoit is up to us to create conditions which do not tax their character too much.&rdquo

He Saw, too, that a certain disproportion prevailed between an indefinite accumulation of wealth and the continuance of political democracy. How long would the many, who formally command sovereignty, submit to the invidiousness and the poverty that accompany &ldquoindustrial despotism&rdquo? But Brandeis wanted to apply a &ldquobrake on democracy&rdquo as well as on runaway capitalism. Socialism he regarded as quite undesirable, as undesirable in fact as immoderate capitalism, of which it seemed to him the product and obverse. The excesses of one bred the vagaries of the other. He preferred voluntary cooperation between freely associated capitalists and freely associated workmen.

Brandeis&rsquo sympathy for the underdog was based therefore not on Marxism or Veblenism, nor even on populism, but on Bentham&rsquos principle of &ldquothe greatest good for the greatest number,&rdquo which proceeds from the premise of things as they are. A proper distribution of fairness could hardly leave the mass of workers to the side. Collective bargaining, to save property from its own abuses and those of socialism the &ldquopreferential shop,&rdquo in which the union is strong but nobody is forced to join, for &ldquomen must have industrial liberty as well as good wages&rdquo the incorporation of unions to insure public responsibility the renunciation of violence and sabotage to insure order and efficiency the cooperation of labor unions with &ldquounions&rdquo of employers in the solution of common problems, for their problems were essentially mutual&mdashsuch, in brief, was Brandeis&rsquo program for a more or less automatic Utopia. Industrial despotism would be succeeded by profit sharing, then by sharing of responsibility. That seems to have been his goal.

The emphasis on voluntary cooperation made Brandeis unsympathetic to those aspects of the New Deal which led to planning and regulation from the outside. In many ways the New Deal was his own spiritual child. Closer regulation of banking, the stock exchange, and holding companies the warmer protection of the investor the separation of investment from deposit banking the recognition of labor&rsquos bargaining rights the establishment of social insurance and the occasional forays of Franklin D. Roosevelt and his followers into the tempting field of limitation of the size, and even income, of corporate enterprise&mdashall these flowed smoothly from Brandeis&rsquo views. The efforts at fact-finding and economic enlightenment pleased him. He had always been in favor of experimental stations and the gathering and distribution of trade information on any scale whatever: for &ldquoscience,&rdquo nothing was too big.

On the other hand, Brandeis did not like a government too busy, too inquisitive, and too fat with delegated powers. There was a danger that the New Deal might kill bigness in business and become itself &ldquobig&rdquo in the process. His distrust of the exaggerated scale applied to political life as well as to economic. In this distrust Brandeis stood four-square on the tradition of liberalism.

This tradition he represented brilliantly on the Supreme Court, along with his older colleague Oliver Wendell Holmes, but in his own peculiar way. He would balance the power of labor and capital. Hence he defended unionization in defiance of &ldquoyellow dog&rdquo contracts imposed by employers, and of court injunctions which protected such contracts. Liberty of contract begins, as Holmes remarked, in an &ldquoequality of position between the parties&rdquo (Hitchman Coal & Coke Co. v. Mitchell, 1917). On the same principle, Brandeis defended the largescale labor organization as a foil to the largescale concentration of capital when that proved to be an accomplished fact (Duplex Printing Co. v. Deering, 1921). The turning of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, originally passed to prevent business monopoly, into a weapon against the activities of labor, particularly strikes, seemed to him outrageous. He told the Court, briefly, that the injunction against refusal to work reminded him of involuntary servitude (Bedford Cut Stone v. Journeymen Cutters&rsquo Association, 1927). For a long time Brandeis fought against the conservative Court&rsquos rejection of state legislation for minimum wages. The individual state, he argued, must be left free to deal with dependency and with that &ldquodemoralization of its citizenry and social unrest which attend destitution and denial of opportunity&rdquo (New York Central Railroad v. Winfield, 1917). Again together with Holmes, he devised the formula of &ldquoa clear and present danger&rdquo of an actual assault upon the state as the only justification for restraining free speech (Schenck v. US, 1919).

His mightiest strokes were directed against capitalist monopoly. Repeatedly he defended the right of states to limit the power of corporations. It seemed to him right that Pennsylvania should tax cab corporations, and Florida chain stores, more heavily than they did individual owners or partners (Quaker City Cab Co. v. Pa., 1928 Leggett v. Lee, 1933). The monopolistic corporation was a modem mortmain through sheer size it dominated not only the consumer but the citizen and the state itself within the corporation, power was slipping into the hands of the few manipulators at the top the &ldquofeudal&rdquo system was back again. &ldquoThe true prosperity of our past,&rdquo he wrote with passion and nostalgia, &ldquocame not from big business but through the courage, the energy, and the resourcefulness of small men.&rdquo

Love of order prevented Brandeis from stopping at mere unrestrained competition. When the conservative Court denounced as monopolistic the pooling of information among the members of a trade association that controlled nearly one-third of the lumber industry, and pointed to the fact that an agreement to curtail production had pushed prices up, Brandeis suddenly tacked between monopoly and knowledge.

&ldquoThe cooperation which is incident to this plan does not suppress competition. On the contrary, it tends to promote all in competition which is desirable. By substituting knowledge for ignorance, rumor, guess, and suspicion, it tends also to substitute research and reasoning for gambling and piracy, without closing the door to adventure, or lessening the value of prophetic wisdom. In making such knowledge available to the smallest concern it creates among producers equality of opportunity. In making it available to purchasers and the general public, it does all that can actually be done to protect the community from extortion.&rdquo

Brandeis seemed to be afraid, too, that if businesses could not combine for information they would simply consolidate into larger units. He, no less than they, was confessing that simple competition was dead. The dilemma landed him almost in the arms of Marx. During the depression of the 30&rsquos, Oklahoma attempted to prevent overproduction and the collapse of prices in the ice industry by licensing and controlling the business as though it were a public utility. It was again the turn of the conservatives to cry monopoly and state socialism. Brandeis answered that society faced new problems and must be allowed to experiment to find solutions which, evidently, he had not (New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, 1932).

&ldquoSome people believe that the existing conditions threaten even the stability of the capitalistic system. Economists are searching for the causes of this disorder and are reexamining the bases of our industrial structure. Businessmen are seeking possible remedies. Most of them realize that failure to distribute widely the profits of industry has been a prime cause of our present plight. But rightly or wrongly, many persons think that one of the major contributing causes has been unbridled competition. Increasingly, doubt is expressed whether it is economically wise, or morally right, that men should be permitted to add to the producing facilities of an industry which is already suffering from overcapacity. . . . All agree that irregularity in employment&mdashthe greatest of our evils&mdashcannot be overcome unless production and consumption are more nearly balanced. Many insist there must be some form of economic control. . . . There must be power in the states and the nation to remold, through experimentation, our economic practices and institutions to meet changing social and economic needs. . . .&rdquo

Brandies&rsquo belated conversion to Zionism presents a baffling problem. Could we but find it, the key to the essential man lies here, if anywhere. &ldquoA typical assimilationist,&rdquo as Mason describes him accurately, Brandeis became a fervent Zionist at the age of fifty-six. &ldquoSeveral members of the Brandeis and Goldmark families had married Gentiles,&rdquo and his relatives did not share his new passion. &ldquoEven Alfred Brandeis, the beloved brother, and his entire family stood aloof from the movement, as did the Goldmarks. In the Justice&rsquos own household only Susan [one of his two daughters] became a Zionist.&rdquo But Brandeis always enjoyed a lonely and difficult eminence. Did his new interest stem from deep idealism? Was it the final burning of the Boston bridges? Did he sniff another unequal struggle?

He had first come in touch with the Jewish world in 1910, in the role of conciliator between the embattled employers and workers in the garment trade. &ldquoWhat struck me most,&rdquo Brandeis said afterwards, &ldquowas that each side had a great capacity for placing themselves in the other fellow&rsquos shoes. . . . They argued, but they were willing to listen to argument. That set these people apart in my experience in labor disputes.&rdquo In any case, the air was bracing. Benjamin Schlesinger, the union leader, was not slow to characterize Brandeis&rsquo preferential shop as &ldquoa union shop with honey.&rdquo The dramatic Isaac Hourwich, given twenty-four hours by Brandeis to make up his mind on a vital issue, remarked that the Czar&rsquos court-martial was in the habit of giving forty-eight. Involved in one way or another in that historic strike were the Socialist leader Morris Hillquit, the Socialist Congressman Meyer London, the Jewish leader and constitutional lawyer Louis Marshall, the banker and philanthropist Jacob Schiff, the civic and social worker Henry D. Moskowitz, the religious reformer Felix Adler&mdasha veritable roll call of the most distinguished and powerful Jewish leaders. Here were men worth anyone&rsquos mettle.

Brandeis joined the Zionist movement in 1912, under the influence of de Haas. His Zionism seemed to be an extension of his liberalism. The liberalism whose unit was the individual had not succeeded in solving the Jewish question a liberalism whose unit was the national group would. The transition was easy. If the individual has a right to life and freedom, why not the group? If the little fellow is entitled to the same rights as the rich and the aristocrat, why is not the little nationality entitled to the same right to an independent cultural and political life as the large nation? It remained only to show that the national group possessed that core of distinctiveness and worthwhileness which it was the aim of traditional liberalism to protect in protecting the individual. This was difficult, and still is. Brandeis said that the individuality of a people was &ldquoirrepressible,&rdquo like that of a person, and let it go at that.

&ldquoThe new nationalism adopted by America&rdquo&mdashthis was said in 1915, in the shadow of the European war and of America&rsquos growing interest in the national issues raised by it&mdash&ldquoproclaims that each race or people, like each individual, has the right and duty to develop, and that only through such differentiated development will high civilization be attained.&rdquo The Jews particularly have the duty to develop their character. For &ldquowhat people in the world has shown a greater individuality than the Jews? Has any a nobler past? Does any possess common ideas better worth expressing? Has any marked traits worthier of development?&rdquo

Ten years earlier, Brandeis had uttered quite different views: &ldquoThere is room here for men of any race, of any creed, of any condition of life, but not for Protestant-Americans, or Catholic-Americans, or Jewish-Americans, nor for German-Americans, Irish-Americans, or Russian-Americans. This country demands that its sons and daughters whatever their race&mdashhowever intense or diverse their religious connections&mdashbe politically merely American citizens. Habits of living or of thought which tend to keep alive differences of origin or to classify men according to their religious beliefs are inconsistent with the American ideal of brotherhood, and are disloyal.&rdquo

But now the same ideal required that the Jew preserve his distinctive national tradition: &ldquoAmerica&rsquos fundamental law seeks to make real the brotherhood of man. That brotherhood became the Jewish fundamental law more than twenty-five hundred years ago. America&rsquos insistent demand in the twentieth century is for social justice. That has also been the Jews&rsquo striving for ages.&rdquo Now &ldquo. . . to be good Americans, we must be better Jews, and to be better Jews, we must become Zionists.&rdquo Every Jew must stand up and be counted as a Zionist or &ldquoprove himself, wittingly or unwittingly, of the few who are against their own people.&rdquo

The self-righteousness is no less evident than the inconsistency and less pardonable. But, in its context, his Zionism refracted the principle of national self-determination that the Wilson administration, with which he was always intimately associated, was promoting as one of the American stakes in the First World War. Brandeis was merely asking for the Jews what Wilson was asking for the Belgians, the Serbs, and the Czechs.

Two years after he became a Zionist the European war transferred the center of gravity of the movement to the United States. An unusual opportunity for leadership came to him. He was suddenly chosen to head the American movement and wielded a large influence until the followers of Chaim Weizmann defeated him in 1921. Thereafter he devoted himself to economic projects for the development of Palestine. His fall was a tragic event, for Zionist leadership represented apparently an attempt on his part to rise from economism to humanism. Yet his congenital approach to the world still governed. He insisted on hard work, careful investment, separation of donations from investments, economic construction rather than political propaganda, and always on sound budgeting and again sound budgeting. He said that &ldquoevery person who wastes a cent, whether it be in a cable, in a salary, or an unnecessary letter, is postponing, directly or indirectly, to perhaps a hundred times that extent, the achievement of our aim.&rdquo De Haas reports that he installed time clocks in the Zionist offices, and assembled endless figures. No one who is familiar with the character and history of Zionism&mdashand I am thinking of its faults as well as its virtues&mdashwill, under all the circumstances, be much surprised that his opponents pronounced Brandeis dead to the emotional and spiritual values of the movement. They may have felt like the Emperor of Austria to whom Richard Cobden, the famous free trader, in 1859, when Italy was demanding the province of Venetia, made the sensible and extraordinary suggestion that he sell the province for a goodly sum and balance his budget. It seems Franz Joseph was not in the real estate business, and he preferred to wage a costly war and lose Venetia. Both Cobden and Brandeis were betrayed by an overdose of common sense.

Here as elsewhere, it appears that the statesmanship of many an economic liberal was private management writ large. Cobden, who began life as a calico salesman, felt, in the words of his biographer, Sir John Morley, that &ldquothe affairs of a country or a nation come under the same laws of common sense and homely wisdom which govern the prosperity of a private concern.&rdquo The statesmanship of Brandeis was much warmer and more social-minded it was, instead, husbandry writ large. With him, economics returned to its original Greek sense of household management. The familiar familial virtues are all there. First comes duty, &ldquowhich must be accepted as the dominant conception of life.&rdquo Then comes work, &ldquothe best game that there is.&rdquo Then follows a homely emphasis on personal effort and ingenuity. The mechanization of industry was one thing, but the mechanization of living quite another. Brandeis was repelled by gadgets and the kind of labor and time-saving devices that undermine the serious exertion and direct responsibility that for him spelled character. Over the whole, broods the conception of thrift and foresight and that anxiety which, as Thomas Hobbes observed, haunts men who are &ldquooverprovident.&rdquo It is the &ldquoperpetual fear&rdquo that &ldquoalways accompanies mankind in the ignorance of causes.&rdquo

The pattern of Brandeis&rsquo thought and the temper of his personality&mdashbut, alas, not his inward soul&mdashare now, I think sufficiently clear. Having devoted himself to the external aspect of the social problem, and avoided its roots and its humanistic as distinguished from humanitarian implications, he was able to apply successfully the principles of a simple symmetry. Along with his liberal and utilitarian compeers of the last century, he helped to improve and reform a polity and a society that had been wrenched from aristocratic moorings to be cast upon a shore covered with jungle. It was only the ultimate question that these men failed to ask themselves, and that was whether a well-organized zoo is really better than a jungle. Whether we can afford to sacrifice profound though ineffable human values to seductive efficiencies is an aesthetic and moral question as much as it is an economic one, and we can blink it no longer. That is why Brandeis, gone but seven short years, already speaks to us in the muted tone of a distant age.

And yet, eventually a zoo, no matter how well organized, would not have suited Brandeis. The truth is that he was a divided man. His recognition of the need of great wealth for true independence did not square with his craving for a Spartan existence each made the other illogical. His philosophy of scientific management and business and industrial engineering clashed with his craving for unmechanized and strenuous personal living. His mind inclined to order and his heart panted for struggle.

Brandeis resolved these paradoxes simply, as strong men do. He gave his passions to his career and his thought to his country. The career is singular and romantic, his thought an indistinguishable part of his age, almost an echo of it. The people from whom he sprang, the country in which he thrived, were absorbed by enterprise, building, exchanging, saving. His mercantile and industrious generation was alarmed by the wolf that comes down on the fold, the wastrels who toil not, neither do they spin, the crickets who laze away the summer and in the winter demand food of the ant. The answer to all these was watch, weigh, measure, count.

&ldquoRemember, O Stranger,&rdquo Louis D. Brandeis exulted, &ldquoArithmetic is the first of the sciences and the mother of safety.&rdquo

1 Alfred Lief, Brandeis: The Personal History of an American Ideal (New York, 1936) Jacob de Haas, Louis D. Brandeis (New York, 1929). These biographies have been supplemented, and in some degree supplanted by Alpheus T. Mason&rsquos Brandeis: A Free Man&rsquos Life (Viking, New York, 1946). This elaborate work of 700-odd pages is authorized by the late Justice.


Watch the video: Bir eksponat tarixi. Қиличлар тарихи (May 2022).