Eisenhower vs. Warren: The Battle for Civil Rights and Liberties

by James F. Simon

The epic 1950s battle that would shape the legal future of the civil rights movement is chronicled here for the first time. The bitter feud between President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Chief Justice Earl Warren framed the tumultuous future of the modern civil rights movement. Eisenhower was a gradualist who wanted to coax white Americans in the South into eventually accepting integration, while Warren, author of the Supreme Court’s historic unanimous opinion in Brown v. Board of Education , demanded immediate action to dismantle the segregation of the public school system. In Eisenhower vs. Warren , two-time New York Times Notable Book author James F. Simon examines the years of strife between them that led Eisenhower to say that his biggest mistake as president was appointing that “dumb son of a bitch Earl Warren.” This momentous, poisonous relationship is presented here at last in one volume. Compellingly written, Eisenhower vs. Warren brings to vivid life the clash that continues to reverberate in political and constitutional debates today. 8 pages of photographs

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, Biography, American History, Legal, Law

448 pages, Hardcover

Published April 10, 2018

About the author

James F. Simon is the Martin Professor of Law and Dean Emeritus at New York Law School. He is the author of seven previous books on American history, law, and politics. His books have won the American Bar Association’s Silver Gavel Award and twice been named New York Times Notable Books. He lives with his wife in West Nyack, New York.

Reviews

[Jean · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have recently been reading books about the relationship between the President and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. I got this book as it sounded most interesting.

This book is well written and meticulously researched. Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren as Chief Justice. At that time the Court was under control of the conservatives. Gradually a controversy between Eisenhower and Warren occurred over McCarthyism and Civil Rights. Their disagreement was about the pace and means of effecting social change regarding Civil Rights. Eisenhower thought Brown Vs Board of Education was not enforceable.

I believe this is an important book particularly considering what is currently happening in our country. Eisenhower wanted to move slowly and use coaxing and reeducation to change behavior about Civil Rights. Warren disagreed and wanted to make legal changes. The book is easy to read. The author made complex legal issues easy to understand for lay people. The author attempted to stay neutral. This book is a great review of the fight for Civil Rights. I highly recommend this book.

I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is fifteen hours and fifty-five minutes. Jonathan Yen does a good job narrating the book. Yen is a well-known voice actor and audiobook narrator.

[Brian Eshleman · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book offers momentous times, impactful personalities, vocabulary with gravitas, but oddly few of the eye-opening moments of application I look for in reading history. Maybe I'm becoming familiar with the middle of the 20th century such that I can't expect such novel experiences. Maybe the author wanted to convey all the novelty of a gray flannel suit. I'd still read it, but I wouldn't prioritize it.

[Matthew Sciarrino · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent. Very timely book. Not only well written, but draws you into the story and lives of two great men, their interactions, their effect on events , and their philosophies. I highly recommend.

[Kristen · Rating 4 out of 5]

In Eisenhower vs. Warren: The Battle for Civil Rights and Liberties, James F Simon details the historic civil rights decisions made under the Earl Warren-led Supreme Court during the Eisenhower administration and Ike's reaction to them. Warren is shown to be a chief justice less concerned with legal prudence and more focused on the question of, is it right or just. Eisenhower is shown to be in favor of civil rights where he believes he has presidential authority (integrating the military, government, and his authority over the District of Columbia) but timid about stepping on state's rights in the south and not backing the court's decisions strongly enough. Eisenhower seems to feel the court went to far too fast and that you can't change the minds and hearts of people through legislation alone, while Warren thinks that if Ike had come out strongly in support of the court's decisions it would have greatly lessened the south's opposition to them.

The book is an interesting account of this very turbulent period in US history.

Full disclosure: I won a copy of this book in a Goodreads First Reads giveaway.

[Peter Goodman · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Eisenhower vs. Warren: the battle for civil rights and liberties,” by James F. Simon (Liveright, 2018). This is a fascinating and powerful book about two of the most consequential American figures of the second half of the 20th century. Simon provides quick, thorough, opinionated biographies of both men. For one thing, he declares that Eisenhower was a bad field commander---the North African campaign was a mess, and the war went a lot better when he let battlefield generals such as Montgomery do the fighting while he did the planning and kept the Allies from killing each other. Simon really likes Warren, who was more likely to have been a presidential candidate than a Supreme Court Justice. Warren was a strong, aggressive district attorney, a smart, politically savvy governor, fiscally and politically conservative. Eisenhower is shown to be more cautious, but also very savvy. Warren had hoped to be the Republican nominee in 1948 or ‘52, but that didn’t happen. He became the chief justice not by accident but by surprise. He had never been a judge, but Ike was looking for someone who was smart, steady, honest, fair. Neither one suspected that Warren would turn out to be the most liberal chief justice in decades, if not in American history. His concern for fairness led him to make broader and broader decisions about civil rights and civil liberties. The Brown vs. Board of Education case had already been argued when Warren joined the court. He persuaded the entire nine, down to the most legalistic, Felix Frankfurter, to decide in favor of desegregation. They knew the South would react as it did, and tried to figure out how to make the new policy work slowly and with the least offense and resistance. But as the cases were fought out, Warren became increasingly outspoken. Eisenhower, however, was much more circumspect: he worked behind the scenes against Joseph McCarthy, but would not speak out in public against him. He never gave full support to the Brown decision, and was very hesitant to step in as it became clear the Southern states would not comply. Eisenhower was much more conservative in outlook that Warren, and seemed to have much more sympathy for the white southerners. Simon tracks the increasing liberalism of the court as William Brennan Jr. came on board and worked to expand civil liberties. Eisenhower came to greatly dislike the direction the court was taking. Kennedy was more sympathetic. One recurring element as I have been reading American history is the entrenched racism, not just in the South but most apparent there. The arguments against desegregation are virtually the same as one hears against rights for African-Americans today. The use of private schools for white students was explicit. State governments threatened to shut down the public schools and give funding to private, white schools. Sounds very contemporary. Simon mentions, but does not emphasize, the right wing turn against the court, and the movement to “impeach Earl Warren.” One dismal element, reported but not dwelt on, is the loss first of Arthur Goldberg and then Abe Fortas as chief justice; they were Johnson’s choices. As a result, President Richard Nixon appointed Warren Burger, and the retreat from liberalism began. A very well written, thoroughly documented and interesting book.


http://books.wwnorton.com/books/detai...

[J.L. Slipak · Rating 4 out of 5]

The bitter feud between President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Chief Justice Earl Warren framed the tumultuous future of the modern civil rights movement. Eisenhower was a gradualist who wanted to coax white Americans in the South into eventually accepting integration, while Warren, author of the Supreme Court’s historic unanimous opinion in Brown v. Board of Education, demanded immediate action to dismantle the segregation of the public school system. In Eisenhower vs. Warren, two-time New York Times Notable Book author James F. Simon examines the years of strife between them that led Eisenhower to say that his biggest mistake as president was appointing that “dumb son of a bitch Earl Warren.” This momentous, poisonous relationship is presented here at last in one volume. Compellingly written, Eisenhower vs. Warren brings to vivid life the clash that continues to reverberate in political and constitutional debates today.

Out April 10, 2018

MY THOUGHTS:

I received this book in exchange for my honest review. I loved it so much, I sat and read it from cover to cover in two days (and nights).

This is a very important book to read. Everyone, should read it. The battle of wits between Eisenhower and Warren are remarkably written well. The pace of the book was intrinsic to the tension building and I was unable to put it down. The author's detail to research is obvious and appreciated. Pivotal moments in US history are detailed expertly as are the ramifications of certain decisions.

What I loved about the author's writing is that he never "assumed" or gave his opinion as to why either man acted as they had. He stayed strictly to documented evidence and kept his own personal opinions out of the mix. Some may say that his explanations fall flat in their content but the author wanted to remain impartial and I feel he succeeded. He wants the readers to develop their own opinions based on facts.

I think if anything, Simon could have provided more evidence as to why decisions were made the way they were. Character profiles, even though detailed, are sometimes just not enough to determine the reasoning behind decisions. There are many other factors that sway thoughts and desires.

This is still an excellent book that highlights the horrid aspects of segregation with behind the scenes look into related decisions made by each man.

I found it truly enjoyable and fascinating a read. If you like political non fiction, then this book would be worthy of a purchase!

[Willy Marz Thiessam · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although I find some problems with this book, I also find it to be an important book.

Eisenhower vs. Warren is a must read for anyone interested in Modern American history. In no other book do I know of are the details regarding the disjuncture between President Eisenhower and Justice Warren regarding the Brown decision and its repercussions so well detailed.

Simon however gives little indication as to why both men acted the way they did. Instead we are treated to an in-depth psychological profile of both men. Both men it appears were flawed so the book suggests. Politicians want to compromise and legal experts must uphold principle and may never compromise. This explanation given by the book however falls flat.

What should have been obvious to Simon is that politicians need to lead, particularly if they find themselves as leaders in a global conflict. This is the character flaw by which Eisenhower's actions make sense. He simply could not lead. Any reader however will draw this conclusion without Simon explicitly stating it.

Politicians must lead as judges must find a balance of interests. The law is all about compromise. There is however no compromise with an enforced, erratic, anachronistic and blatant evil that was segregation. Despite masses of detail Simon fails to detail the legal principals that led Warren to his decision. Instead we merely get a detail character profile of Warren.

While the book gives us great detail it fails to explain the important legal principals underlying the dispute and similarly fails to explain why Eisenhower acted the way he did.

[Aloysius · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eisenhower allegedly said later in his life that one of his biggest mistakes as president was appointing Earl Warren as president. But when you think of that for a minute, that sounds kind of odd at first glance if you have surface-level knowledge of the two men's biographies. Both were moderate, internationalist Republicans who were favorable inclined towards civil rights.

But scratch a little deeper, and you can see differences not only in the level of passion that each man brought to issues like school desegregation, but also the surprisingly large rift between them over civil liberties in the context of the Cold War. What is particularly interesting is how on the latter issue, each man started on somewhat opposite ends of the spectrum (Eisenhower's exhortation to not "join the book burners" vs. Warren's support for a loyalty oath requirement for California university faculty) and moved past each other to the other end of the spectrum, respectively.

[Luis Cuesta · Rating 4 out of 5]

I received this book as a Goodreads giveaway. James F. Simon’s “Eisenhower vs. Warren” deals with a genuinely difficult problem: how to dismantle the iron system of racial segregation supported overwhelmingly by Southern electorates (from which blacks were mostly excluded) in thousands of schools with millions of students. The effects of that issue in a crusading chief justice and a cautious president is the most interesting aspect of the book.
Eisenhower and Warren were born less than six months apart but had very different paths into the Republican Party and Washington. Tracing their routes to power, Simon underlines how neither had the traditional qualifications or experience for the positions they attained. Also Simon’s book offers a glimmer of hope that the court can and will once again take a stand, something still valid to for today´s struggles.

[Ross · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed this mini-biography of Eisenhower and Warren because I was alive when it was all going on. I think only history majors would be interested, however, for those born after 1950.
The important part of the history is the Supreme Court ruling in 1954 that ended the so-called "separate but equal" segregation of schools that was being used in the South to maintain segregation. I remember very clearly thinking how despicable Southerners were to try to keep blacks down and make sure they couldn't get a decent education.
So that was the only important thing that occurred in the Eisenhower Presidency, and it was Chief Justice Earl Warren that was responsible. Eisenhower did appoint Warren, but he gets no credit because he regretted the appointment after Warren made the ruling. Eisenhower was not really terribly smart and Warren was.

[Kathleen · Rating 5 out of 5]

First of all, I was given a copy of this book through Net Galley in exchange for an honest review.

This is a particularly good biography for the present day and time in American politics. We all seem to accept imperfections in those we love. But we expect leaders to be cardboard cutouts of goodness and evil. Both Eisenhower and Warren were complex, intelligent men who were burdened with egos and pride. And sometimes ego and pride were obstacles to what I believe were their better natures.

This was fantastically written and well researched. And I came away with a deeper appreciation for and a better understanding of both men. They both, for all their differences, underscore the reality they were men who believed they were there to serve the country, not just themselves and not just a party. They were America's better self.

[Paul Gibson · Rating 4 out of 5]

4/5 stars for Eisenhower vs Warren: The Battle for Civil Right and Liberties.
This is the third book I’ve read by James F. Simon. The others were,
What Kind of Nation: Thomas Jefferson, John Marshall, and the Epic Struggle to Create a United States and,
Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney: Slavery, Secession, and the President's War Powers.
Each has been an easy, quick read. I read this one because Eisenhower was president when I was born, and I remember the “Save our Republic - Impeach Earl Warren” billboards that were posted throughout the south during the 60’s. In the end, I found admiration for both Eisenhower and Warren. And history has judged them well. Each of these books has caused me to wonder what this country would look like without the characters involved. It is hard to imagine.

[Luv · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book isn't just good, it's an important read.c It's the story of Eisenhower and Warren, but each chapter delves into some of the most crucial periods in history. cWhile reading a passage from the chapter on McCarthyism aloud, the person I shared it with thought I was talking about Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. cHistory truly does repeat itself.

If I understand correctly, near the book's end, Chief Justice Warren contemplates leaving the Supreme Court. He finds comfort in Robert Kennedy's popularity and feels confident in his decision. However, Kennedy's assassination throws everything into question, and Nixon's likely victory casts a dark shadow. This, again, suggests an eerie repetition of history.

Initially borrowed from the library, I found this book so interesting that I decided to purchase my own copy. I've already recommended it to several people.

[UChicagoLaw]

James Simon's Eisenhower vs. Warren: The Battle for Civil Rights and Liberties (Liveright 2018), will be released on April 3 but can be pre-ordered on Amazon. I read it as a reviewer for the publisher. It is terrific. Simon offers a truly masterful telling of the complex relationship between two of the most influential and compelling figures in mid-twentieth century America. Exploring such fundamental issues as racial segregation and McCarthyism, Simon takes us beyond the scenes in the White House, the Congress, and the Supreme Court to reveal with extraordinary intimacy the conflicts, the compromises, and the sometimes shaped antagonisms that shaped one of the most pivotal periods in American history. Quite frankly, I couldn't put it down! —Geoffrey R. Stone

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a really thoughtful, interesting dual biography of the President and the Chief Justice he appointed, much to his later chagrin. Simon does a really nice job tracing the ways the two men's views shaped their attitudes and actions on civil rights and civil liberties in the 1950s and 60s. My one concern with the book is that the payoff for a dual biography is pretty limited. For most of the book, the value of pairing the two leaders together isn't clear. Simon contrasts well the political and judicial responses to the major flashpoints of the era, particularly subversive speech and school integration, but that isn't a particularly compelling reason to write this book in this way. Ultimately, it's a well-written and enjoyable book.

[Nancy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eisenhower vs. Warren: The Battle for Civil Rights and Liberties / James F. Simon. This book, read aloud, is also a history (see The Professor and the Madman), as well as a biography of two men. Not as exceptionally written, it is a very interesting approach to the post-WWII civil rights era of the fifties and into the sixties. A good deal of personal background is provided for President Eisenhower and Chief Justice Warren before consideration of their relationship and responsibilities during a period of great judicial and executive actions. We welcomed the new and the familiar in this overview.

[David Rogers · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good and interesting read. While the topic sometimes strayed away from the actual relationship between Warren and Eisenhower, the subject matter was still interesting. Fun fact I didn't know - Warren was Dewey's running mate in '48. While I actually consider Eisenhower to be one of the better presidents, he did benefit from having no wars during his 8 years and the fact that the US benefited the most of all countries from the post-WW2 economic boom. He also had a tepid enthusiasm for racial equity and justice, preferring to move slowly. So it was good that the Warren court existed to help move the country toward desegregation. Hooray for Earl Warren.

[Jeff · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well, I didn't know about Warren, he was just a stick figure in other histories I'd read. So getting an understanding of him really fleshes out an aspect of the 50s for me. What a good American.

Then the lens that Simon looks at American history through, that legal lens, is so very important. One of the basic structures of American freedom is the rule of law. I've just taken it for granted, and now, in my old age, I have come to need to understand it.

This book has spurred me on to buy two more of Simon's books. One on Roger Taney and another on Renquist. I'll go through those and perhaps get more. I need to know this stuff.

[Ietrio · Rating 1 out of 5]

The text is wordy. It is not a pleasant read. Simon seems to be a qualified medium channeling how this character smiled and how thick the fog was that day.

Also, the text itself is crap. One authoritarian thinking he knows best for the inferiors, and who generated smart useful things like the Japanese concentration camps, facing another authoritarian who does not know much about the world, but he does like to rule, military style. Wasting paper to argue decades later who was better only builds the conspiracy of What If.

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

Simon plumbs the interplay of politics and the law with insight and force. He grasps and describes the subtleties of each. Like his two subjects here, he aspires to be fair (and right). He succeeds. The portrayals of Warren as a judge driven by principle and Eisenhower as a President driven by practicality and caution resonate and underline how that same interplay continues to create tensions in the US. As do the very relevant tensions between an "activist" and "judicial restraint" -oriented Supreme Court Justice. Also: there's also plenty more fascinating background and back and forth on the civil rights battles in the 50's, the roles of Johnson, Nixon, Ike and others.

[Dennis McClure · Rating 4 out of 5]

I question some of his history—especially on Eisenhower’s war years. But the conflict and contrast between Eisenhower and Warren covers the most momentous events in America’s history at mid century.

In the end, I would suggest that these two men, in cooperation or in conflict, were responsible for taking us a long step forward toward a fundamentally better country.

I don’t recommend this book because of its eloquence. I recommend it for what it can teach us.

[Josh · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating look at two towering historical figures who had a lot more in common than either would have been willing to admit. Moderation seems especially quaint at this moment in American history, but both Warren and Eisenhower believed in it passionately, and this book makes a case that an important element of moving the country forward involves knowing when to take small steps and when larger ones are required.

[gillian alessio · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very good read. James F. Simon is amongst the best historians of our time. Mr. Simon's writing is straightforwardly engaging. I was captured in the first pages and transported back in time to 1955. The relationship between a great President and one of the most, if not the most, influential Chief Justice is fascinating and informative. The struggles and lessons of the 1950s and 1960s are still the struggles of today. Our history informs our future.

[Calvin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simon has shown one again that he is the premier writer on our supreme Court. His 4th book on the relationship between a president and Chief Justice (if you count) the Jefferson & Marshall book) is as interesting as those that came before. And more importantly it's accessible to the professional and the layman.

[Ken Oder · Rating 4 out of 5]

A thoughtful, well-researched study of both men and their approach to civil rights and civil liberties, using Brown v. Bd. of Educ. as its focal point. Well written, easy to read, unburdened by cumbersome legalese. I came away understanding both men better and, despite their human flaws, admiring them both.

[Stephen McDonald · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book. Nominated as Chief Justice by Eisenhower, Warren began by forging a unanimous opinion on Brown vs Board of Education in 1953. In the 60’s his court took on long deferred action on Congressional redistricting and finally the rights of the accused in Miranda vs Arizona.

Warren’s mantra was to keep open the doors of the Supreme Court to “the poor, the friendless, the little man.”

[Faith Justice]

Dear Friends,

I did not read this book or add it to my shelf. Something's screwy and I've notified GoodReads. Hopefully we can get find out what happened and why this book appeared with three others on my shelf and in my update status feed.

Thanks for your patience, while I track this down.

Faith Justice

[Drew Reilly · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was fantastic. I've always appreciated the Warren court, but never fully comprehended the background and fights with Congress and the Presidency. Every person who has an interest in history, constitutional law or the separation of powers NEEDS to read this accessible book about the beginnings of the Warren court.

[Bill Sleeman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting. A solid and informative joint biography and policy study. Useful for anyone who wants to better understand the interplay of executive and judicial forces during this period of civil rights history.

[Dan Biber · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent. well-written and engrossing story of the two personalities.