Book Review: Contempt of Court, the Turn-of-the-Century Lynching that Launched a Hundred Years of Federalism

Part of being a lawyer is attending Continuing Legal Education courses. This is supposed to help keep you updated on the law. Usually these are very boring and usually limited in their usefulness. However, sometimes you run into something interesting. The other day I attended a course that focused on the Supreme Court's handling of a lynching case in 1906. This was turned into a production book, Contempt of Court, the Turn-of-the-Century Lynching that Launched a Hundred Years of Federalism.

Although I do not practice in constitutional law these days (I used to litigate 8th amendment issues at a previous firm), I do enjoy the subject matter. It is in fact the reason I went to law school in the first place. I digress; the course I attended was focused around a book written about the rape of a white woman in Tennessee. A black man was accused and his rights were trampled through a quick trial where he was found guilty and sentenced to death despite evidence to the contrary of his guilt. The man was convinced no to appeal but his family engaged two remarkable lawyers to handle an appeal. This went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court that ordered his execution stayed. After his execution was stayed he was promptly lynched by the good townspeople.

The story involves the only criminal hearing ever held by the high court. It is a very interesting story. It is a dirty period in American history but worth looking at. First, you get to meet one of my favorite Justices, John Marshall Harlan, one of the more colorful Justices to ever sit the bench. Additionally, the story is gripping. It is beyond horrific how a man can be fingered by a man who seems by all accounts to be lying, not be identified positively by the victim, have a dozen alibi witnesses and then be sentenced to death. Then when justice seems just within his grasp, he is taken by the townspeople and hung. In the background are two lawyers who might actually give my profession a good name. They did everything humanly possible to save this man, their efforts were in short heroic.

Additionally, the man who was lynched, Ed Johnson, never gave in when he was being coerced into confession. He always maintained his innocence. I have done extensive research into war crimes, genocide and related subjects. The techniques that police, secret and otherwise, have used to coerce confessions are very effective. It is just impressive that Mr. Johnson never gave in and maintained his innocence to the end. He was a brave man.

It all seems insane from a legal standpoint. But this is 1906 not 2008 and the world was a much different place. I think this book is worth the time. I enjoy the legal issues involved in this book from an intellectual stand point. I think that even if you are not inclined to the court related analysis that the story is worth reading for a glimpse into some things that we shouldn't forget.