Learned Hand 392191 225998268 2008-07-16T11:21:10Z Qp10qp 1545602 /* References */ source {{Infobox Judge | name = Learned Hand | image = Learned Hand urn-3 HLS.Libr 1148132a.jpg | imagesize = | caption = Learned Hand | office = [[Judge]] of [[United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]] | termstart = 1924 | termend = 1951 (as active judge), 1961 (senior status) | nominator = [[Calvin Coolidge]] | appointer = | predecessor = [[Julius Marshuetz Mayer]] | birthdate = {{birth date|1872|1|27|mf=y}} | birthplace = [[Albany, New York]] | successor = [[Harold Raymond Medina]] | office2 = [[Judge]] of [[United States District Court for the Southern District of New York]] | termstart2 = 1909 | termend2 = 1924 | nominator2 = [[William Howard Taft]] | appointer2 = | predecessor2 = (none, new seat) | successor2 = [[Thomas D. Thacher]] | deathdate = [[August 18]], [[1961]] | deathplace = [[New York, New York]] | spouse = Frances Amelia Fincke Hand | children = Mary Deshon, Frances and Constance | religion = [[Protestantism|Protestant]] as a youth, [[Agnosticism|Agnostic]] as an adult }} '''Billings Learned Hand''' ([[January 27]], [[1872]] &ndash; [[August 18]], [[1961]]) was a famed [[United States|American]] [[judge]]. Hand served for many years as [[Chief Judge]] and intellectual leader of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]], headquartered in [[Manhattan]], after prior service on the [[United States District Court for the Southern District of New York]]. Hand is remembered in connection with early cases construing the [[free speech]] clause of the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] and as a pioneer in applying [[economic]] reasoning to American [[tort]] law. He is considered by many to be the most influential American judge never to have served on the [[Supreme Court of the United States]]. When asked who was the most outstanding among his colleagues, Supreme Court justice [[Benjamin Cardozo]] once replied, referring to Hand, that "The greatest living American jurist is not ''on'' the Supreme Court".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=ix}}</ref> Hand is noted more for his legal philosophy than for his decisions as a judge, most of which were routine and obeyed precedent.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=17}}</ref> His speeches and writings on issues of [[constitutional law]] are considered significant and challenging, but his service as a judge on lower federal courts limited the extent to which he influenced the major constitutional issues of his time from the bench. While his decisions have often been superseded by subsequent precedent, Hand's legal philosophy confronts timeless issues. He was, unusually, both a political progressive and an advocate of [[judicial restraint]]. He argued that the Constitution does not empower courts to overrule the legislation of elected bodies, except in extreme circumstances. On these grounds, he cautioned strongly against the use of [[judicial review]] to strike down laws. Hand's popular reputation owed little either to his record as a judge or to the subtleties of his legal philosophy. He rose to fame in 1944 after giving a short address in Central Park that reached millions through the radio and publication in the press. From that point, Hand became an almost legendary figure, often acclaimed in the press as an inspiration and a fount of wisdom. Despite his warnings that freedom depends on the people and not on the courts, Hand was seen as a great judge by many libertarian reformers. ==Early life== [[Image:Learned Hand and his father.jpg|thumb|Billings Learned Hand and his father, Samuel Hand, in 1876]] Billings Learned Hand was born on [[January 27]], [[1872]] in [[Albany, New York|Albany]], [[New York]], as the second and last child of Samuel and Lydia Hand (née Learned). His mother's family had a tradition of using surnames as given names; hence his unusual middle name. Hand struggled with his name during his childhood and adult life, as he believed the names "Billings" and "Learned" were not sufficiently masculine. At one point during his childhood, he signed his name as "Billings Learned Hand", and in college and at law school, he signed papers as "B. Learned Hand", leading his classmates to speculate that the first initial stood for "Buck". Hand often worried whether either "Billings" or "Learned" were adequately masculine, and in 1899 he was to drop "Billings" as too "pompous".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=5}}; {{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=13}}</ref> Hand grew up in comfortable circumstances on Albany's main residential street. The Hands were an eminent family, at the brink of the town's [[upper class]], with a tradition of activism in the [[Democratic Party (United States)| Democratic Party]] and an “almost hereditary” attachment to the legal profession.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=3, 7, 40}}; {{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=3}}</ref> They have been described as "the most distinguished legal family in northern New York".<ref>Charles E. Wyzanski, quoted in {{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=13}}</ref> Samuel Hand was an [[appeal|appellate]] lawyer.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=13}}</ref> He quickly rose through the ranks of an Albany-based law firm in the 1860s, and by age 32, he was the firm's top lawyer. He became the leader of the appellate bar and argued appeals before the New York Court of Appeals in "greater number and importance than those argued by any other lawyer in New York during the same period".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=7}}</ref> Samuel Hand was a distant, intimidating figure, and Learned Hand later described his relations with him as "not really intimate".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=6}}</ref> He died from cancer when Hand was just fourteen,<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=3}}</ref> and Hand's mother promoted an idealized memory of her husband's intellectual abilities, professional success and parental perfection.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=6–9}}</ref> Lydia Hand was an involved and protective mother, who had been influenced by a [[Calvinism|Calvinist]] aunt as a child; and she passed on a strong sense of duty and guilt to her only son.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=10–11}}</ref> Eventually, Learned Hand came to understand these parental influences as formative.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=4, 6, 11}}</ref> Influenced by his mother's Calvinist values, Hand looked to his religion to help cope with his father's death. To his cousin Gus, he wrote, "If you could imagine one half the comfort my religion has given to me in this terrible loss, you would see that Christ never forsakes those who cling to him."<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=22}}</ref> The depth of Hand's religious convictions was in sharp contrast to his [[agnosticism]] in later life. Hand was beset by anxieties and self-doubt throughout his life, including [[night terror]]s as a child. Hand later recalled that he was "very undecided, always have been—a very insecure person, very fearful; morbidly fearful."<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=4}}</ref> Especially after his father's death, he grew up surrounded by doting women: his mother, aunt, and his sister Lydia (Lily), eight years his senior, who called him "Bunny" or "B", the latter a nickname that lasted throughout his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=4–5}}</ref> Hand spent two years at a small primary school before transferring to [[The Albany Academy]] at the age of seven, which he attended for the next 10 years. He did not enjoy the Academy's uninspired teaching or its narrow curriculum, which focused on [[Ancient Greek]] and [[Latin]], with few courses in English, History, Science or Languages. Socially, he considered himself an outsider, rarely enjoying recesses or the school's out-of-class military drills.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=20, 23–25}}</ref> After his father's death, Hand felt an increased pressure from his mother to excel academically. He finished near the top of his class and was accepted into [[Harvard University]], which his classmates—who opted to attend colleges like [[Williams College|Williams]] and [[Yale University|Yale]]—thought was a "stuckup, snobbish school".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=26}}</ref> Vacations, spent in [[Elizabethtown, New York|Elizabethtown]], [[New York]], were happier times. There, Hand developed a life-long friendship with his cousin (and future colleague) [[Augustus Noble Hand]], two years his senior.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=3–4}}</ref> The two were self-described "wild boys", camping and hiking in the woods and hills, and Hand developed a love of nature and the countryside.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=20–22}}</ref> Many years later, when Hand was in his seventies, he recorded for the [[Library of Congress]] several songs he had learned as a boy from [[American Civil War| Civil War]] veterans in Elizabethtown. ==Harvard== [[Image:Learned Hand in Phi Beta Kappa Cropped.jpg|thumb|left|Learned Hand (seated, third from left) with other [[Phi Beta Kappa]] students at Harvard College in 1893.]] Hand started at [[Harvard College]] in 1889, initially focusing on Classical Studies and Mathematics as advised by his late father. At the end of his sophomore year, however, he changed direction, embarking on courses in [[Philosophy]] and [[Economics]], and studying under the prominent and inspirational philosophers [[William James]], [[Josiah Royce]] and [[George Santayana]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=32–33}}</ref> At first, Hand found Harvard a difficult social environment. He was not selected for any of the social clubs that dominated campus life, and felt this exclusion keenly. He was equally unsuccessful with the [[Harvard Glee Club|Glee Club]] and the football team, although for a time Hand rowed as a substitute for the rowing club. However, after a year, Hand gave up rowing to focus on his studies. He described himself as a "serious boy", a hard worker who did not smoke, drink or consort with the prostitutes in town.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=26–30}}</ref> But in his sophomore and senior years, he did mix more: he became a member of the [[Hasty Pudding Club]], appeared as a blond-wigged chorus girl in the 1892 student musical, and he was also elected president of [[The Harvard Advocate]], a student literary magazine.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=30–31}}.</ref> Hand's studious ways resulted in his election to [[Phi Beta Kappa]]<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p= 4}}.</ref> and graduating [[summa cum laude]], having earned a [[Masters degree|master's]] as well as a [[Bachelor degree|bachelor's degree]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=32}}</ref> He was also chosen by his classmates to deliver the Class Day oration at the 1893 commencement.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=4}}</ref> Family tradition and expectation suggested that he would study law after graduation, but he seriously considered post-graduate work in Philosophy. Receiving no encouragement from family or the philosophy professors who had inspired him, however, he lacked the confidence to follow his desires; as he put it, he then "drifted" towards Law.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=40–43}}</ref> [[Image:Learned Hand at Harvarda.jpg|thumb|Students outside [[Austin Hall (Harvard University)|Austin Hall]] at [[Harvard Law School]]. Hand is second from right in the front row. (from between 1894 and 1896)]] Hand's three years at [[Harvard Law School]] were intellectually and socially stimulating. In his second year, he moved into a boarding house with a group of fellow law students, who were to become close friends. They studied hard, and enjoyed discussing philosophy and literature, as well as telling bawdy tales. Hand's intellectual reputation proved less of a hindrance at Law School than it had as an undergraduate, and he was elected both to the Pow-Wow Club, in which law students practiced their skills in [[moot court]]s, and to the [[Harvard Law Review]], although he resigned from the latter in 1894 because it took too much time from his studies.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=46–47}}</ref> During the 1890s, Harvard Law school was pioneering the [[casebook method]] of teaching introduced by Dean [[Christopher Langdell]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Dworkin| 1996|p=333}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Carrington| 1999|p=206}}</ref> Hand's professors included Jeremiah Smith, Joseph Beale, [[Samuel Williston]], [[John Chipman Gray]], [[James Barr Ames]] and Langdell himself. Hand preferred those teachers who ventured beyond pure casebook study into the philosophy of law and who valued common sense and fairness.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=47–50}}</ref> His favorite professor was [[James Bradley Thayer]], who taught him [[Evidence (law)|Evidence]] during his second year, and [[Constitutional Law]] in his third. Thayer was a man of broad interests who emphasized the Law's historical and human dimensions rather than its certainties and extremes. He stressed the need for courts to exercise [[judicial restraint]] in deciding social issues, and was to be a major influence on Hand's own jurisprudence.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=50–52}}; {{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=4}}</ref> ==Albany legal practice== Graduating from Harvard Law at the age of 24 in 1896, Hand returned to Albany, living with his mother and aunt and starting work for the law firm in which his uncle was a partner. This uncle's unexpected death a few months later obliged him to move to a new firm, where by 1899 he had become a partner, though he found it difficult to attract clients.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=53–55}}; {{Harvnb|Carrington|1999|p=137}}</ref> Hand's initial legal experiences were not satisfying, and he found the work trivial and dull.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=14}}</ref> He spent much time researching and writing briefs, and opportunities for the appellate work he preferred were limited. Even when the chance came, his early courtroom appearances were frequently difficult, further reducing his already limited self-confidence.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=56–59}}</ref> Hand found life and work in Albany constraining and depressing,<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=4–5}}</ref> and tried to expand his activities. He joined a lawyers' discussion group held monthly in [[New York City]], returned to writing scholarly articles, taught part-time at [[Albany Law School]], and developed an interest in politics.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=59–61}}</ref> Hand came from a line of loyal [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democrats]], but he supported [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] [[Theodore Roosevelt]] in the 1898 New York gubernatorial election. Despite his abhorrence for Roosevelt's role in the "military imperialism" of the [[Spanish–American War]]<!--This en dash is correct: see M0S-->, he liked the "amorphous mixture of socialism and laisser faire" in his campaign speeches.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=61–63}}</ref> Hand caused further family controversy by registering as a Republican in the [[United States presidential election, 1900|Presidential election of 1900]], although his switch did not prove permanent, and over the course of the years he voted equally for Democratic and Republican candidates.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=64–65}}</ref> Professionally and intellectually, Hand continued to feel stifled. He began applying for jobs in New York City, despite strong family pressure not to move.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=68–70}}</ref> ==Marriage and New York== By the age of 30, Hand had yet to have a serious interest in a woman, and considered himself destined for bachelorhood. However, during a 1901 summer holiday in the [[Québec]] resort of [[La Malbaie]], he met 25 year old Frances Fincke, a graduate of [[Bryn Mawr College]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=72}}</ref> Though indecisive in most matters, he waited only a few weeks before proposing, but the more cautious Frances postponed her answer for almost a year. In the intervening months, Hand began to look more seriously for work in New York City, while writing to and occasionally seeing Fincke.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=78}}</ref> The next summer both Hand and Fincke returned to La Malbaie, and at the end of August 1902 they became engaged and kissed for the first time.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=79}}</ref> Following the engagement, Hand accepted a post at the law firm of Zabriskie, Burrill & Murray, moved to New York, and the pair were married on [[December 6]], [[1902]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=80–81}}</ref> The couple were to have three daughters, Mary Deshon (born 1905), Frances (born 1907) and Constance (born 1909). Hand proved an anxious husband and father, corresponding regularly with his doctor brother-in-law about difficulties conceiving, his offspring's childhood illnesses, and family planning issues. Hand himself survived pneumonia in February 1905, taking months to recover.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=172–74}}</ref> [[Image:View of Woolworth Building fixed.jpg|thumb|left|In 1914, Hand moved his chambers from the dilapidated Post-Office–Court Building (left) into the recently completed [[Woolworth Building]], then the tallest in the world, just across Broadway.]] The family initially spent summers in [[Mount Kisco]], with Hand commuting at the weekends, but after 1910 they rented summer homes in [[Cornish, New Hampshire]], eventually buying a house there in 1919, which they called "Low Court".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=7}}</ref> Cornish was a nine-hour train journey from New York, however, and the couple were separated for long periods, with Hand able to join the family only for vacations.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=171–73}}</ref> They made close friends with a [[Dartmouth College]] professor, Louis Dow. With tension in the marriage, Frances spent increasing amounts of time in Cornish with Dow in Hand's absence, but despite some speculation there is no evidence that they were lovers. Hand maintained a long friendship with Dow, while regretting Frances' long absences, and urging her to spend more time with him.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=183–87}}</ref> He blamed himself for his lack of insight into her needs in the early years of the marriage, noting his "blindness and insensibility to what you wanted and to your right to go your own ways when they differed from mine". He came to accept Frances' desire to spend time in the country with another man, fearing that otherwise he might lose her altogether.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=187–88}}</ref> While staying in Cornish in 1908, Hand began a close friendship with [[Herbert Croly]], a political commentator and philosopher.<ref>{{Harvnb|Stettner|1993|p=25}}</ref> Croly was writing his influential ''[[The Promise of American Life]]'', which examined American history and proposed a plan for political reform in which a stronger national government would further democratic and egalitarian goals.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=190-193}}</ref> When the book was published in November 1909, Hand sent copies to friends and acquaintances, including one to former President [[Theodore Roosevelt]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Stettner|1993|p=76}}</ref> Croly's work influenced Roosevelt's politics including his advocacy of [[New Nationalism]], and the development of [[Progressivism]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=195, 198–202}}</ref> Hand continued to be disappointed in his progress at work, and a move to the firm of Gould & Wilkie in January 1904 brought neither the increased challenges nor the financial rewards he had hoped.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=101–105}}</ref> He later admitted, "I was never any good as a lawyer, I didn't have any success, any at all."<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=107}}</ref> In 1907, deciding that at the age of 35 success as a lawyer was out of reach, Hand campaigned for a new federal judgeship that was expected to be created in the [[United States District Court for the Southern District of New York| Court for the Southern District of New York]]. When the post was finally created in 1909, he renewed his candidacy, and with the help of the influential Charles C. Burlingham, a senior New York lawyer and close friend, he gained the support of [[US attorney general| Attorney General]] [[George Wickersham]]. One of the youngest federal judges ever appointed, he took his judicial oath in April 1909.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=123–24, 128–33}}; {{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=14}}; {{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=5}}</ref> ==Federal judge== Hand served as a [[federal judge]] to the Southern District of New York from 1909 to 1924. He dealt with fields of [[common law]], including [[torts]] and [[contracts]], as well as with [[bankruptcy]], [[copyright]], [[admiralty law|admiralty]], and [[patent]] law. His unfamiliarity with some of these specialisms, as well as his limited courtroom experience, caused him initial anxieties.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=135–36}}</ref> Most of Hand's early cases were in patent law, which fascinated him, and in bankruptcy, which he found tiresome.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=137–38, 144–45}}</ref> [[Image:LearnedHand.jpg|Learned Hand|thumb|right]] He also occasionally gave important decisions in the area of free speech. A frequently cited 1913 decision was ''United States v. Kinnerley'', an obscenity case concerning the novel ''Hagar Revelly'', which contained a few scenes of a frankly sexual nature. Hand allowed the case to go forward on the basis of [[precedent]], which stemmed back to a seminal English decision of 1868, ''Regina v. Hicklin''. The [[Hicklin test]], as it was known, determined obscenity from isolated passages rather than from an entire work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=154}}</ref> It also judged the potential effect of such passages on susceptible readers rather than on the intended readership.<ref>{{Harvnb|Rabban|1999|p=146}}</ref> In giving his opinion, Hand took the opportunity to argue that the obscenity rule should not have a sole purpose of protecting the most susceptible group but should reflect the standards of the community, as they alter: <blockquote>It seems hardly likely that we are even to-day so lukewarm in our interest in letters or serious discussion as to be content to reduce our treatment of sex to the standard of a child's library in the supposed interest of a salacious few, or that shame will for long prevent us from adequate portrayal of some of the most serious and beautiful sides of human nature.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=149–50}}</ref></blockquote> Following his elevation to judgeship, Hand became politically active in the cause of [[New Nationalism]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=202}}</ref> He supported, though not unquestioningly, [[Theodore Roosevelt]]'s return to national politics in 1911, approving of the former president's campaign against abuse of judicial power, his plan for laws to address the needs of underprivileged Americans, and his advocacy of regulation rather than [[trust-busting]] to control corporations.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=202–204}}; {{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=14}}</ref> Hand sought to influence Roosevelt's views on these subjects in person and in print, and he wrote articles for Roosevelt's magazine ''The Outlook''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=206–210, 221–24}}</ref> However, his hopes of swaying Roosevelt were frequently dashed, and Roosevelt's faulty grasp of legal issues exasperated him.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=212–25}}</ref> When, despite overwhelming support for Roosevelt in the [[United States presidential primary|primaries]] and polls, the Republican nomination went to [[President Taft]], a furious Roosevelt bolted from the party to form the [[Progressive Party (United States, 1912)|Progressive Party]], nicknamed the "Bull Moose" movement, along with most Republican progressives, including Hand.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=227–29}}</ref> The splitting of the Republican vote between two candidates, combined with the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party's]] nomination of the progressive [[President Woodrow Wilson|Woodrow Wilson]], dimmed Roosevelt's chances of success. As Hand expected, Roosevelt was defeated by Wilson in the [[United States presidential election, 1912|November 1912 presidential election]], despite polling more votes than Taft. Hand viewed the presidential vote merely as a first step in the national campaign for reform and "real national democracy".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=229–32}}</ref> Though he had limited his public involvement in the Progressive campaign out of professional discretion, Hand now participated in the planning of a party structure, which incorporated [[Jane Addams]]'s [[Progressive Service]], an educational organization aimed at spreading the reformist agenda to the public and to the legislators. Despite growing misgivings about his public involvement in politics, Hand accepted the Progressive nomination for chief judge of [[New York Court of Appeals]] in September 1913,<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=5}}</ref> though he refused to campaign, later admitting that "the thought of harassing the electorate was more than I could bear".<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=14}}</ref> His vow of silence affected his showing in the election and he was easily defeated, though he was privately pleased to receive 13 per cent of the votes.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=233–36}}</ref> Hand came to regret his candidacy: "I ought to have lain off, as I now view it; I was a judge and a judge has no business to mess into such things".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=237}}</ref> By 1916, Hand was resigned to the fact that the Progressive Party was going nowhere. The liberal policies of the Democratic administration had rendered much of its program redundant; and Roosevelt's decision not to stand in the [[United States presidential election, 1912|1916 Presidential election]] dealt the party its death blow.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=239–41}}</ref> Hand's political views, however, did not change; and he had found an outlet for them in Herbert Croly's ''[[The New Republic]]'', a liberal magazine that he had helped launch in 1914.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=190, 241–44}}</ref> Hand wrote a series of articles for the magazine, usually anonymously, on issues of social reform and judicial power, and often attended staff dinners and meetings, becoming a close friend of the gifted young editor [[Walter Lippmann]]. Hand’s only signed article was "The Hope of the Minimum Wage", published in November 1916, in which he argued for legislation to protect the underprivileged.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=190, 250–51}}</ref> The outbreak of [[World War I]] had coincided with the founding of the magazine, and events in Europe increasingly impinged on its content. ''The New Republic'' adopted a cautiously sympathetic stance towards the [[Allies of World War I|Allies]], which Hand supported wholeheartedly. Following the 1917 entry of the [[United States]] into the war, Hand considered leaving the bench as several possible war-related positions presented themselves, though none came to fruition.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=251–56}}</ref> [[Image:Conscription.jpg|thumb|left|upright|Conscription, a drawing by [[Henry J. Glintenkamp]] published in ''[[The Masses]]'' in 1917 and deemed by the postmaster of New York City "to arouse discontent and disaffection"]] Hand's most notable decision of the war period came in 1917 in ''[[Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten]]''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=176}}</ref> After the U.S. entered World War I, the [[United States Congress|Congress]] enacted an [[Espionage Act of 1917|Espionage Act]] which made it a [[federal crime]] to criticize government policies. The first test of the new law came two weeks later when the postmaster of New York City refused to deliver the August issue of ''[[The Masses]]'', a self-described "revolutionary journal" that contained drawings, cartoons, and articles criticizing the government's entry into the war.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=151, 157}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Stone|2004|pp=164–165 157}}</ref> The publishing company sought an [[injunction]] to prevent the ban, and the case came before Judge Learned Hand.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=151–52}}</ref> In July 1917, he ruled that the journal should not be barred from distribution through the mail. Though ''The Masses'' opposed the war and supported those who refused to serve in the forces, the journal’s text did not, in Hand's view, tell readers that they ''must'' violate the law. Hand argued that material suspected of being seditious should be judged according to what he called an "incitement" test: only if its language directly urged readers to violate the law was it illegal—otherwise freedom of speech should be protected.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|pp=177–78}}; {{Harvnb|Rabban|1999|p=296}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Stone|2004|p=177}}</ref> Hand's focus on the words themselves, rather than on their effect, was novel and daring, but his decision was quickly blocked, and then overturned on appeal.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=152, 156–60}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Stone|2004|pp=165–170}}</ref> Despite this judicial reversal, Hand always contended that his ruling had been correct, and between 1918 and 1919 attempted to convince Supreme Court Justice [[Oliver Wendell Holmes]] of his argument. While his efforts initially appeared fruitless, Holmes' dissenting opinion in ''[[Abrams v. United States]]'' in November 1919 urged greater protection of political speech, and adopted Hand's "incitement test".<ref>{{Harvnb|Irons|1999|pp=270, 275, 279–60}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=161–7}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Stone|2004|pp=198–207}}</ref> In the long-term, Hand’s decision proved a significant moment in the history of free speech in the country.<ref>"Judge Hand's injunction against the postmaster's exclusion of ''The Masses'' from the mails, though reversed on appeal, is seen, in retrospect, as the precursor of the federal court's present protection of freedom of the press." Judge Charles E. Wyzanski. Qtd. {{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=6}}</ref> Hand was eventually vindicated in the late 1960s when the Supreme Court announced a standard for protecting free speech that in effect recognized his ''Masses'' opinion as law.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=151–52, 170}}</ref> [[Image:Physically fit-Glintenkamp.jpg|thumb|right|upright|Physically Fit, a drawing by [[Henry J. Glintenkamp]] published in ''[[The Masses]]'' in 1917 and introduced as supplemental evidence during the trial.]] Hand knew very well that going against the government in the ''Masses'' case would probably harm his prospects of promotion, but he had resolved, as always, to judge the issue on the facts alone.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=155}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Stone|2004|pp=165–166}}</ref> By the time of the case, he was already the senior judge of his district. Such was his standing that the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]] increasingly summoned him to hear appeals, a task he found more stimulating than his routine work as a district judge. In 1917, he was lobbying for promotion to the Second Circuit, but the unpopularity of his ''Masses'' decision and his reputation as a liberal stood against him, and he was passed over in favor of [[Martin T. Manton]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=161, 257–260, 270–71}}</ref> In August 1918, Hand was given the chance to serve his country when he chaired a [[State Department]] committee on [[intellectual property]] issues in preparation for the upcoming [[Paris Peace Conference, 1919|Paris Peace Conference]]. Planning a leave of absence from the bench, Hand also accepted a position as "Delegate for Patents and Trademarks" to the conference itself, but in December 1918 he was disappointed to learn that he would not be going to France, since the delegation had been trimmed.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=256–57}}</ref> In the final months of the war, Hand had become increasingly supportive of President Wilson's post-war foreign policy objectives. In November 1918, he publicly signed the statement of principles of the newly formed League of Free Nations Association, which declared that Wilson's proposal of [[League of Nations]] was key to "a sounder future international order".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=261–63}}; {{Harvnb|Westbrook|1993|p=235}}</ref> Hand's support for the League of Nations and for American ratification of the [[Treaty of Versailles]], which, despite serious flaws, he regarded as essential, led to his estrangement from Croly and other friends from the ''The New Republic'' who in May 1919 declared vehement opposition to both. Alienated both from his old circle on the magazine and from the reactionary and isolationist mood of the country, Hand found himself politically homeless.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=263–66}}</ref> ==Between the wars== When the next Second Circuit vacancy arose in 1921, with the reactionary [[Warren G. Harding]] administration in power, Hand did not enter the race. In 1924, however, Harding's successor, [[Calvin Coolidge]], seeking to refresh a senior judiciary noted for inefficiency and corruption, gladly appointed Hand to the Second Circuit, where he was to serve for the remainder of his career. It was a tribute to Hand’s increased stature that conservative figures such as Coolidge and Chief Justice [[William Howard Taft]], who had once dismissed him as "a wild Roosevelt man and a Progressive",<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=15}}</ref> were now prepared to support him, despite his supposed radical views.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=270–77.}} Hand regarded the idea that he was a radical as absurd.</ref> In 1926 and 1927, the Second Circuit was strengthened by the appointments of [[Thomas Swan]] and Hand's cousin [[Augustus Noble Hand]]."<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=281}}</ref> After the demise of the Progressive Party, Hand had become less willing to identify himself publicly with partisan causes.<ref>{{Harvnb|Dworkin|1996|p=333}}</ref> He committed himself to judicial objectivity, despite his strong views on political issues such as the growth of [[antisemitism]] and the anti-radical hysteria stoked by fear of the [[Russian Revolution]]. He remained, however, a passionate supporter of freedom of speech, and any sign of the "merry sport of Red-baiting" alarmed him. In 1920, for example, he wrote in support of New York mayor [[Al Smith]], who had vetoed the anti-sedition [[Lusk Bills]] approved by the [[New York Assembly]] in moves to bar five elected [[Socialist Party of America| Socialist Party]] legislators from taking their seats.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=344–52}}</ref> In 1922, he privately opposed a proposal to limit the number of Jewish students admitted to Harvard College. He insisted that students be selected on academic merit alone: "If we are to have in this country racial divisions like those in Europe, let us close up shop now."<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=362–68}}</ref> In public, Hand spoke only in general terms about issues of democracy, free speech, and toleration. This restraint, plus a series of well-prepared speaking engagements, won him a growing reputation among legal scholars and journalists,<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=16}}</ref> and by 1930 he was regarded as a serious candidate for a seat on the Supreme Court. Although Hand’s appointment was championed by his friend [[Felix Frankfurter]] and others, [[Herbert Hoover|President Herbert Hoover]] chose to overlook him, possibly for political reasons.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=418–28}}. Hoover appointed [[Charles Evans Hughes]], a previous Republican candidate for the presidency, as [[Chief Justice]], making the appointment of fellow New Yorker Hand impossible.</ref> Hand had supported Hoover for the presidency in 1928, and he did so again in 1932; but in 1936, he voted for the Democrats and [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]]. His change in allegiance was a consequence of the economic and social turmoil that followed the [[Wall Street Crash]] of 1929. As the country fell deeper into the economic slump that became the [[Great Depression]], Hand supported a policy of government intervention to improve the lot of the people, accepting Frankfurter’s view that redistribution of wealth had become necessary for economic recovery. Hoover resisted this approach, owing to his party’s belief in individualism and free enterprise; but Roosevelt promised the people a [[New Deal]] and was elected on a platform of strong executive leadership and radical economic reform, to be paid for by deficit spending. Hand voted for Roosevelt again in 1940 and 1944, but he always remained wary of the constitutional dangers of big government and central decisions that overrode local legislation. Like others, including Walter Lippmann, he saw the dictatorial potential of New Deal policies; and he was particularly critical of the [[Judiciary Reorganization Bill of 1937]], when Roosevelt attempted to expand the Supreme Court in order to pack it with his supporters.<ref>{{Harvnb|Carrington|1999|p=146}}</ref> Hand was increasingly called upon to judge cases arising from the flood of New Deal legislation; and the line between central government’s authority and local legislation frequently tested his powers of judgment. In 1935, the case of ''[[Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States|United States v. Schechter]]'' came before the Second Circuit. Faced with deciding whether a New York poultry firm had contravened New Deal legislation on unfair trade practices, Hand and his two fellow judges ruled that the [[National Industrial Recovery Act]] did not apply to the Schechter Poultry Corporation because its trade did not directly operate outside the state and congressional authority extended only to interstate commerce. "The line is no doubt in the end arbitrary," Hand wrote in a memorandum, "but we have got to draw it, because without it Congress can take over all the government." Hand became an acknowledged expert in judging cases arising from New Deal statutes. He relished the challenge of interpreting statutory legislation, calling it "an act of creative imagination".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=471}}; {{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=163}}</ref> In a 1933 broadcast he summed up the balancing act required from a judge when interpreting statutes: <blockquote>On the one hand he must not enforce whatever he thinks best; he must leave that to the common will expressed by the government. On the other, he must try as best he can to put into concrete form what that will is, not by slavishly following the words, but by trying honestly to say what was the underlying purpose expressed.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=472}}</ref></blockquote> ==World War II== When war broke out in Europe in 1939, Learned Hand adopted an anti-isolationist stance, though he rarely spoke out publicly, not only because of his position but because he thought fighting talk unseemly in an old man.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=485}}</ref> In February 1939, Hand became the senior circuit leader (in effect, [[chief judge]]) of his court, taking over by right of seniority from [[Martin Manton]], who resigned after corruption allegations.<ref name =s5>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=5}}</ref> Hand was no admirer of Manton, but he testified at Manton's trial that he had never noticed any corrupt behaviour in his predecessor. For years afterwards, Hand, who had sat in two cases in which Manton accepted bribes, worried that he should have detected his colleague's corruption.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=503–509}}</ref> As chief judge, Hand concentrated on relations with his judges and on cleansing the court of the odour of corruption. He still regarded his main job as judging and sought to free both himself and his judges from too great an administrative burden. <ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=514–16}}</ref> Despite the Manton case and constant friction between two judges, [[Charles Edward Clark]] and [[Jerome Frank]], the Second Circuit gained a reputation for outstanding work and became one of the best [[appellate courts|appeal courts]] in the country’s history.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=521}}; {{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=5}}</ref> Hand's friends lobbied for his promotion to the [[Supreme Court]] when a vacancy arose in 1942, but Roosevelt overlooked him, ostensibly because of his age but possibly from philosophical differences with Hand.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=9–10}}</ref> Hand was deeply disappointed but came to regret his ambition: "It was the importance, the power, the trappings of the God damn thing that really drew me on".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=566–70}}; {{Harvnb|Dworkin|1996|p=335}}</ref> Hand was relieved when the United States entered the war in December 1941. He felt free to participate in various organizations and initiatives connected with the war effort. He became particularly committed to programmes in support of Greece and Russia. He backed Roosevelt's campaign for the [[United States presidential election, 1944|1944 election]], partly because he feared a return to isolationism and the long-term effects of the wartime erosion of civil liberties.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=535–41}}</ref> In 1943, the [[Dies Committee]] had aroused Hand's fears by launching a crusade against "subversive activities", and he had protested on behalf of a contemporary at Harvard College, [[Robert Morss Lovett]], who was accused of subversion by the committee.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=541–43}}. Lovett was removed from his government job, but in 1946 the Supreme Court ruled his dismissal unconstitutional.</ref> As the end of the war approached, there was much talk of international peace organizations and courts to prevent future conflict, but Hand was skeptical. After the war, he was also out of step in condemning the [[Nuremburg trials| Nuremburg war-crimes trials]], which he saw as motivated by vengeance, because he did not believe that "aggressive war" could be construed as a crime. "The difference between vengeance and justice," he wrote later, "is that justice must apply to all".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=543–47}}</ref> Hand was not well-known to the general public, but a short speech he made in 1944 won him fame and a national reputation for wisdom that lasted for the rest of his life.<ref name = s16>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=16}}</ref> On [[21 May]] [[1944]], he spoke to almost one and a half million people in [[Central Park]], New York, at the annual "I Am an American Day" event, where newly naturalized citizens swore the [[Pledge of Allegiance]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=11–12}}</ref> He stated that all Americans were immigrants, and that they had come to America in search of liberty. Liberty, he said, was not located in constitutions, laws, and courts, but in the hearts of the people. In the most often quoted passage of his speech, Hand asked: <blockquote>What then is the spirit of liberty? I cannot define it; I can only tell you my own faith. The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right; the spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understand the minds of other men and women; the spirit of liberty is the spirit which weighs their interests alongside its own without bias; the spirit of liberty remembers that not even a sparrow falls to earth unheeded; the spirit of liberty is the spirit of Him who, near two thousand years ago, taught mankind that lesson it has never learned, but has never quite forgotten; that there may be a kingdom where the least shall be heard and considered side by side with the greatest.<ref>Qtd. {{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=549}}</ref></blockquote> The speech was not immediately noticed, but extracts appeared in ''[[The New Yorker]]'' on [[10 June]], and several weeks later ''[[The New York Times]]'' printed the whole text, quickly followed by ''[[Life (magazine)|Life]]'' magazine and ''[[Reader's Digest]]''.<ref name = s16>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=16}}</ref> Hand’s message that it was within people’s own power to safeguard liberty struck a cord, and he suddenly found himself a [[folk hero]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=11–13}}</ref> He enjoyed the acclaim but thought it unmerited. Gunther, who notes the paradox of the [[agnostic]] Hand's use of religious overtones, suggests that the most challenging aspect of the speech was the notion that the spirit of liberty is a spirit of doubt.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=549–52}}</ref> ==Postwar years== Learned Hand's seventy-fifth birthday in 1947 was much celebrated in the press and in legal circles. C. C. Burlingham, Hand's former sponsor, for example, rated him as "now unquestionably the first among American judges".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=575}}</ref> Hand remained modest in the face of such acclaim and continued to work much as before, combining his role as presiding judge of the Second Circuit with an engagement in political issues. In 1947, he voiced his objections to a proposed "group libel" that would ban [[defamation]] of racial or minority groups. He believed that because intolerance has no basis in evidence, the effect of the proposed prosecutions would be "rather to exacerbate than to assuage the feelings which lie behind the defamation of groups".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=576–77}}</ref> In the postwar period, Hand shared the dismay of his compatriots about [[Stalinism]] and the onset of the [[Cold War]], but he was conscious of the domestic problems that arose from an increasingly obsessive fear of international [[Communism]]. Already in 1947, he noted that "the frantic witch hunters are given free rein to set up a sort of Inquisition, detecting heresy wherever non-conformity appears".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=578}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Stone|2004|p=398}}</ref> Hand quickly found himself opposed to the crusade against domestic [[Subversion (politics)|subversion]] that became part of American public life, particularly to the [[House Un-American Activities Committee]], of which senator [[Joseph McCarthy]] became the figurehead in 1950. From this time, with the US fighting Communists in [[Korea]], the committee's increasingly extremist campaign to expose subversives in American society became known as [[McCarthyism]]. Though Hand expressed his horror of McCarthyism privately, he never did so publicly, on the grounds that it was "very undesirable for a judge to take public positions on matters that were likely to come before him".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=585}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Stone|2004|p=399}}</ref> For the same reason, he even refused to publicly support lawyers attacked for defending those charged with disloyalty.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=585}}</ref> [[Image:LearnedHand1910a.jpg|thumb|right|Learned Hand]] During this period, Hand took part in three notable cases that presented a particular challenge to his impartiality on Cold War issues: ''United States v. Coplon'', ''[[Dennis v. United States|United States v. Dennis]]'', and ''United States v. Remington''. [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]] worker [[Judith Coplon]] had been convicted of stealing and attempting to pass on [[Defense (military)|defense]] information and sentenced to fifteen years in prison. Coplon's [[appeal]], which came before a Second Circuit panel that included Learned Hand, rested on her claim that her rights under the [[Fourth Amendment]] had been infringed by a [[search warrant|warrantless search]] and that details of illegal [[wiretaps]] had not been fully disclosed at her trial. Hand noted that Coplon was plainly guilty of the charges, but he rejected the trial judge's conclusion that a warrantless arrest had been justified and ruled that the package of papers seized during the arrest had therefore been inadmissable as evidence.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=592–97}}</ref> He further ruled that the trial judge's failure to disclose all the wiretap records made a reversal of Coplon's conviction necessary, since her [[Sixth Amendment]] right "to be confronted with the witnesses against [her]" had been violated.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=595}}</ref> In his written [[Legal opinion|opinion]], he observed that "[F]ew weapons in the arsenal of freedom are more useful than the power to compel a government to disclose the evidence on which it seeks to forfeit the liberty of its citizens".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=596}}; {{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=37}}</ref> Many followers of the trial sent Hand [[hate mail]] for his decision. In the 1950 case of ''United States v. Dennis'', in which Hand affirmed the convictions under the 1940 [[Smith Act]] of eleven leaders of the [[Communist Party of the United States]] for subversive activities,<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|pp=176–81}}; {{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=150–52}}</ref> he was attacked from the opposite political direction, for appearing to side with McCarthyism.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=598–99}}</ref> In 1953, Hand wrote a scathing dissent from a Second Circuit decision to affirm the conviction for [[perjury]] of [[William Remington]], a government economist accused of Communist sympathies and activities. In 1951, the same panel had overturned Remington's previous conviction for perjury, but Hand was outvoted two to one in the appeal of the later case, for which the prosecution had produced stronger evidence against Remington, much of it obtained from his wife. Sentenced to three years imprisonment, Remington was murdered in November 1954 by three fellow inmates, who beat him over the head with a brick wrapped in a sock. According to biographer Gerald Gunther, "The image of Remington being bludgeoned to death in prison haunted Hand for the rest of his life".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=62425}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Stone|2004|p=369}}</ref> Only after he stepped down as a full-time judge in 1951 did Hand add his voice to the public debate on McCarthyism. Shortly after announcing his semi-retirement, he gave an unscripted speech that was recorded by a [[stenographer]] and published in ''[[The Washington Post]]'', an anti-McCarthy newspaper: <blockquote>[M]y friends, will you not agree that any society which begins to be doubtful of itself, in which one man looks at another and says: "He may be a traitor," in which that spirit has disappeared which says: "I will not accept that, I will not believe that—I will demand proof. I will not say of my brother that he may be a traitor," but I will say, "Produce what you have. I will judge it fairly, and if he is, he shall pay the penalties; but I will not take it on rumour. I will not take it on hearsay. I will remember that what has brought us up from savagery is a loyalty to truth, and truth cannot emerge unless it is subjected to the utmost scrutiny."—will you not agree that a society which has lost sight of that, cannot survive?<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=587}}</ref></blockquote> Hand followed this up with a carefully scripted address to the [[Board of Governors| Board of Regents]] of the [[University of the State of New York]] the following year. Once again, his condemnation of traitor-hunting won approval from many liberals. When he was asked to send a copy of his views to McCarthy, he replied that he had [[Richard Nixon]], the [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] [[Vice President of the United States|vice-presidential]] nominee for the [[United States presidential election, 1952|1952 election]], in mind as well.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=588–89}}</ref> Despite his concerns about Nixon, Hand voted for [[Dwight Eisenhower]], whom he later credited with bringing about McCarthy's downfall in 1954.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=589–90}}</ref> ==Semi-retirement and death== In 1951, Hand retired from "regular active service" as a federal judge.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp= 586–87, 639}}</ref> He assumed [[senior status]], a form of semi-retirement, and continued to sit on the [[Second Circuit]], with a considerable work load.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=15}}</ref> The following year, he published ''The Spirit of Liberty'', a collection of essays and speeches that neither he nor the publisher, [[Alfred A. Knopf]], expected to make a profit. In fact, the book earned admiring reviews, sold well, and made Hand more widely known. <ref name = s16>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=16}}</ref> A paperback edition in 1958 sold even better, though Hand always refused royalties for material he never intended for publication.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=639–43}}</ref> Augustus Noble Hand died in October 1954, but Learned Hand himself remained in good physical and mental condition. In 1958, he gave the [[Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.]] Lectures at [[Harvard Law School]]. These lectures proved to be the last major critique of [[judicial activism]] from a progressive and included a sustained attack on the [[Warren Court]]'s 1954 decision in ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]]'', which in his opinion had exceeded its powers by overruling [[Jim Crow laws|Jim Crow segregation laws]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=654–57}}; {{Harvnb|Carrington|1999|pp=141–43}}</ref> Published as ''The Bill of Rights'', the lectures became a national bestseller. Their many critics deplored the fact that Hand's views might give sustenance to reactionaries who opposed libertarian judicial rulings. Most critics overlooked Hand's concession that the arguments for a "third chamber" to review legislation were worth considering for the future.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=662–64}}; {{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=109}}</ref> By 1958, Hand was suffering from intense pain in his back and faced difficulty in walking. "I can just manage, with not infrequent pauses, to walk about a third of a mile," he wrote to [[Felix Frankfurter]]. "My feet get very numb and my back painful. The truth is that 86 is too long".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=674}}</ref> Soon, he was obliged to use crutches, but he remained mentally sharp and continued to hear cases. For a brief period in 1960, Hand worked on [[Dwight D. Eisenhower|President Eisenhower]]'s "Commission on National Goals", but he resigned because "it involved more work than in the present state of my health I care to add to the judicial work that I am still trying to do".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=676}}</ref> In June 1961, by which time he was in a wheelchair, Hand joked that he felt idle, having taken part in no more than 25 or 26 cases that year, and that he would start another job if he could find one.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=677}}</ref> The following month, he suffered a heart attack at [[Cornish, New Hampshire]], and was taken to [[St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center| St Luke's Hospital]] in New York City, where he died peacefully on [[18 August]] [[1961]]. A front-page obituary in the ''[[New York Times]]'' called Hand "the greatest jurist of his time". ''[[The Times]]'' of London wrote: "[T]here are many who will feel that with the death of Learned Hand the golden age of the American judiciary has come to an end".<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=679}}</ref> ==Philosophy== Hand's study of philosophy at Harvard left a lasting imprint on his thought. After he lost his faith as a student, [[skepticism]] became his gospel.<ref>"Skepticism is my only gospel, but I don’t want to make a dogma out of it." Quoted by [[Lewis F. Powell]], Foreward, {{Harvnb|Gunther| 1994| p= x}}</ref> Hand's view of the world has been called [[moral relativism|relativistic]]. In scholar Kathryn Griffith's words: "It was his devotion to a concept of relative values that prompted him to question opinions of the Supreme Court which appeared to place one value absolutely above the others, whether the value was that of individual freedom or equality or the protection of young people from obscene literature."<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=vii}}</ref> Hand's wide reading in philosophy, history, and literature informed his quest, most famously in [[obscenity]] and [[civil liberties]] cases, for objective standards in constitutional law.<ref>{{Harvnb| Gunther| 1994|p=405}}</ref> For him, the Constitution and the Law are compromises to resolve conflicting interests and possess no moral force of their own.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970| p=165}}; {{Harvnb|Dworkin|1996|p=12}}</ref> Hand's denial that divine or [[natural rights]] are embodied in the Constitution led him to a [[legal positivism|positivistic]] view of the [[United States Bill of Rights| Bill of Rights]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=192}}; {{Harvnb|Dworkin|1996|p=342}}</ref> He interpreted the [[Constitutional amendment|amendments]] only through their wording and in the light of history, not as "guides on concrete occasions".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| pp=131, 139–40}}; {{Harvnb|White|2007|p=218}}</ref> For Hand, moral values are a product of their times and a matter of taste. Hand's liberal instincts were in tension with the duty of a judge to stay aloof from politics.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970| p=186}}</ref> As a judge he respected even bad laws, but as a member of society he felt free to question the decisions behind legislation. He took it as the right of members of a democratic society to advocate for their own values to influence government.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| pp=57–58}}</ref> Toleration, for him, was therefore a prerequisite of civil liberty. In practice, this meant that those who wish to promote ideas repugnant to the majority should, within broad limits,<ref>"The limits Hand placed on choice are similar to those [[John Stuart Mill]] placed upon freedom when he denied the freedom to destroy liberty or the social and political structure which protected it." {{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=60}}</ref> be free to do so. Hand's critics countered that toleration is itself a value and one that is not achieved politically through skepticism and detachment.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| pp=56–57}}</ref> Hand was also skeptical in his [[political philosophy]]. As early as 1898, he rejected his family’s Jeffersonian [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democrat tradition]].<ref>{{Harvnb| Gunther|1994|pp=62–63}}</ref> He later described himself as "a conservative among liberals, and a liberal among conservatives".<ref>{{Harvnb|Carrington|1999|p=138}}; {{Harvnb|Polenberg|1995|pp=296–301}}</ref> His thoughts on liberty, collected in ''The Spirit of Liberty'' (1952), were a response to the conflicting political philosophies of [[Thomas Jefferson]] and [[Alexander Hamilton]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=193–94}}</ref> Jefferson believed that each individual has a right to freedom of expression, and that government, though necessary, is a threat to that freedom. Hamilton believed that freedom depends on government of society: too much individual freedom leads to anarchy and the tyranny of the mob.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=65}}</ref> Hand, who took a [[Thomas Hobbes|Hobbesian]] view of human society, leaned towards Hamilton.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=86}}</ref> The freedom afforded the pioneers was for him no longer feasible.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther| 1994| p=193}}</ref> He accepted that individual liberty should be moderated by society’s norms;<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=67}}</ref> but he saw liberty as vital in matters touching peoples' creativity and democratic rights. Hand viewed the end of human beings as the "good life", defined as each individual freely chooses.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=190}}</ref> The publication of [[political philosophy|political philosopher]] [[Herbert Croly]]’s ''[[The Promise of American Life]]'' in 1909, with its anti-Jeffersonian plea for strong government action on pressing economic and social issues, awakened Hand's social conscience. Between 1909 and 1916, he attempted to translate his [[skepticism|philosophical skepticism]] into political action.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=61}}</ref> He joined the [[New Nationalism]] movement and the [[Progressive Party]], which ran on a platform of increased executive authority to regulate industry and improve working conditions. His withdrawal from partisanship after 1916 marked a recognition that active party politicking was incompatible not only with his role as a judge but with philosophical objectivity. Hand's belief in [[planned economy|central planning]] resurfaced during the 1930s in his tentative approval of [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]]’s [[New Deal]], a massive programme of government [[economic interventionism|intervention]] to address the social and economic problems of the [[Great Depression]]. Hand was also an [[interventionism (politics)|interventionist]] on foreign policy. He supported U.S. involvement in both world wars and disdained [[non-interventionism|isolationism]]. ==Jurisprudence== Hand has been called one of the United States’ most significant judicial philosophers.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970| p=191}}</ref> A leading advocate of [[judicial restraint]], he took seriously [[Alexander Hamilton]]'s statement that "the judiciary … may truly be said to have neither ''force'' nor ''will'', but merely judgement."<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=83}}</ref> Any judicial ruling that had the effect of legislating from the bench troubled Hand, particularly the [[Judicial Review]] decisions of the Supreme Court. In 1908, in his article "Due Process of Law and the Eight-Hour Day", he attacked the 1905 Supreme Court ruling in ''[[Lochner v. New York]]'', which had struck down a law prohibiting bakery staff from working more than ten hours a day. The decision set a precedent by which the Supreme Court struck down a series of similar worker-protective federal and state laws, judging on "[[due process]]" grounds that they stifled [[freedom of contract]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Dworkin|1996|p=412}}</ref> Hand regarded this principle as undemocratic. "For the state to intervene to make more just and equal the relative strategic advantages of the two parties to the contract, of whom one is under the pressure of absolute want, while the other is not, is as proper a legislative function as that it should neutralize the relative advantages arising from fraudulent cunning or from superior force."<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|pp=118–23}}</ref> The issue concerned Hand again during the period of the New Deal, when the Supreme Court repeatedly overturned or obstructed Franklin D Roosevelt’s legislation.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| pp=18–19}}</ref> As an instinctive democrat, Hand was appalled that an elected government should have its laws struck down in this way. In his view, the Supreme Court was assuming the role of a third chamber in these cases.<ref>{{Harvnb|Horwitz|1995|p=264}}</ref> He did not oppose the idea of a superlegislature to review legislation, but he deemed it a judicial [[usurpation]] for the Supreme Court to assume this role by right.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| pp=109, 211}}; {{Harvnb|Gunther| 1994|p=122}}; {{Harvnb|Schick|1970| pp=162–63}}</ref> He considered that the Constitution already provided a full set of checks and balances on legislation. Nevertheless, Hand did not condone Roosevelt's frustrated attempt to [[Judiciary Reorganization Bill of 1937|pack the Supreme Court in 1937]],<ref>{{Harvnb|Carrington|1999|p=141}}</ref> which led commentators to warn of [[totalitarianism]]. The answer, for Hand, was the preservation of the [[separation of powers]], and an independent court, ruled by judicial restraint and deference to the legislation of elected governments.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| pp=219–222}}</ref> Hand’s democratic respect for legislation meant that he hardly ever struck down a law.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=164}}</ref> Whenever his decisions went against the government, he based them only on the boundaries of law in a particular case. He adhered to the doctrine of presumptive validity, which assumes that legislators know what they are doing when they pass a law.<ref>{{Harvnb|White|2007|p=235}}</ref> Even when a law was uncongenial to him, or when it seemed contradictory, Hand set himself to interpret the [[legislative intent]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=112}}</ref> Sometimes, however, he was obliged to draw the line between national and state laws, as in the important case of ''USA v. Schechter'', where he ruled that a [[New Deal]] law on working conditions did not apply to a New York poultry firm whose business did not directly intersect with that of other states.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=112–113}}</ref> Hand wrote in his opinion: “It is always a serious thing to declare any act of Congress unconstitutional, and especially in a case where it is part of a comprehensive plan for the rehabilitation of the nation as a whole. With the wisdom of that plan we have nothing whatever to do …”<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=112–13}}</ref> Hand also occasionally went against the government in the area of free speech. He believed that the courts should protect the right to free speech, when necessary, even against the majority will. In Hand’s view, the courts must remain detached during periods of national hysteria when the popular majority is hostile to minorities and governments issue laws to repress those minorities.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=107–108}}</ref> Hand was the first judge to rule on a case arising from the [[Espionage Act of 1917]], which sought to silence opposition to the war. In his decision on ''[[Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten]]'', he defined his position on political incitement: <blockquote>Detestation of existing policies is easily transformed into forcible resistance of the authority which puts them in execution, and it would be folly to disregard the causal relation between the two. Yet to assimilate agitation, legitimate as such, with direct incitement to violent resistance, is to disregard the tolerance of all methods of political agitation which in normal times is a safeguard for free government. The distinction is not scholastic subterfuge, but a hard-bought acquisition in the fight for freedom”.<ref>Qtd. {{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=144}}</ref></blockquote> In the case of ''[[Dennis v. United States|United States v. Dennis]]'' in 1950, Hand gave a ruling that appeared to contradict his ''[[Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten|Masses]]'' decision. By then, a series of precedents had intervened, often based on [[Oliver Wendell Holmes]]’s "[[clear and present danger]]" test, that constrained his latitude for decision.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=604–605}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Stone|2004|p=404}}</ref> Hand felt he had "no choice" but to agree that the threats made by a group of [[Communists]] against the state amounted to an incitement to violence under the [[Smith Act]] of 1940, a repressive law of which he disapproved.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=146–53}}</ref> However, he first weighed all factors in the case, not just the degree of threat.<ref>{{Harvnb|Irons|1999|p=380}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=180}}</ref> In his Holmes Lectures of 1958, Hand insisted that "no matter how rapidly we utter the phrase 'clear and present danger', or how closely we hyphenate the words, they are not a substitute for the weighing of values".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=153}}</ref> In all cases, he refused to make one value absolute, whether it be national security, public morals, or even equality.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=155}}; {{Harvnb|Horwitz|1995|p=259}}</ref> In Griffith’s opinion, "The importance of Learned Hand’s philosophy in terms of practical application to the courts lies generally in his view of the [[pragmatic]] origin of all law, but most specifically in his unique interpretation of the Bill of Rights."<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| pp=192–93}}</ref> Hand proposed that the Bill of Rights was not law at all but a set of "admonitory" principles designed to ensure the fair exercise of constitutional powers.<ref> {{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973|pp=130–38}}; {{Harvnb|Horwitz|1995|pp=262–63}}</ref> He therefore opposed the use of its "due process of law" clauses as a pretext for national intervention in state legislation. He even advocated the removal of those clauses from the Constitution. In his analysis, "due process" is no more than a stock wording to cover a long tradition of [[common law]] procedure.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=122}}</ref> An inflation in the term's scope during the nineteenth century had lent the courts a supervisory role over legislation that Hand believed was never intended by the Bill of Rights. The result, he claimed, was the misuse of due process to invade rights that the Constitution was designed to protect. For Hand, a law passed by an elected body should be presumed to meet the test of due process; a court that judges otherwise and strikes down such a law is acting undemocratically.<ref>"The statute may be far from the best solution of the conflict with which it deals; but if it is the result of an honest effort to embody that compromise or adjustment that will secure the widest acceptance and most avoid resentment it is 'Due Process of Law' and conforms to the First Amendment." From Hand's ''The Bill of Rights.'' Qtd. {{Harvnb|Schick|1970| p=163}}</ref> Hand maintained his opposition to the practice even when the Supreme Court invoked due process selectively in civil-liberties cases to produce liberal verdicts.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=383}}; {{Harvnb|Carrington|1999|p=140}}</ref> He regarded this as unwarranted intrusion by the judiciary into purely political matters.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973|pp=128–29}}</ref> Hand’s reasoning has never been widely accepted. Critics of his position included his colleague on the Second Circuit, [[Jerome Frank]], who wrote: "[I]t seems to me that here, most uncharacteristically, Judge Hand indulges in a judgement far too sweeping, one which rests on a too-sharp either-or, all or nothing, dichotomy. … Obviously the courts cannot do the whole job. But just as obviously, they can sometimes help to arrest evil popular trends at their inception."<ref> {{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973|p=140}}</ref> ==Influence== Learned Hand has been quoted more often in Supreme Court opinions and by legal scholars than any other lower court judge.<ref>{{Harvnb|Vile|2003|p=319}}</ref> Certain of his decisions and dissents have had a lasting influence on the law. His dissent in ''[[United States v. Kinnerley]]'' and his ruling on ''[[Ulysses (novel)|Ulysses]]'' have often been cited in obscenity cases.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=157}}; {{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=149}}</ref> Hand’s insistence that literary works be judged as a whole and according to their intended readership is now accepted in law. His approach to statutory interpretation has also often been followed, leading to the widespread use of historical data in assessing legislative intent. According to jurist [[Archibald Cox]]: "The opinions of Judge Hand have had significant influence both in breaking down the restrictions imposed by the dry literalism of conservative tradition and in showing how to use with sympathetic understanding the information afforded by the legislative and administrative processes."<ref>Qtd. {{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=174}}</ref> Hand's decision in the 1917 ''Masses'' case influenced [[Zechariah Chafee]]’s widely read book, ''Freedom of Speech'' (1920). In his dedication, Chafee wrote that Hand "during the turmoil of war courageously maintained the traditions of English-speaking freedom and gave it new clearness and strength for the wiser years to come".<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970| p=178}}</ref> Learned Hand played a key role in the interpretation of [[federal crime]] laws in the period following the passing of the U.S. Criminal Code in 1909, contributing to that code's evolution as an effective [[legal instrument|instrument]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| p=35}}</ref> His opinions have also resonated in fields of [[commercial law]]. Legal students studying [[torts]] often encounter Hand's 1947 decision for ''[[United States v. Carroll Towing Co.]]'', which gave a formula for determining liability in cases of [[negligence]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Weinrib|1995|p=48.}} Hand proposed that the defendant's duty is a function of three variables: the probability of an accident's occurring, the gravity of loss if it should occur, and burden of adequate precautions. He expressed this in the algebraic formula: "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends on whether B is less than L multiplied by P: ie., where B is less than PL."</ref> Hand’s interpretations of complex [[Inland Revenue]] codes, which he called "a thicket of verbiage", have also helped guide decisions in the grey area between individual and [[corporate tax|corporate taxes]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=169}}</ref> In a frank observation sometimes misinterpreted as encouraging tax avoidance, Hand stated in a 1947 opinion that "there is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|p=26}}</ref> He was referring to the practice of individuals reporting income through corporate [[Tax forms in the United States|tax forms]] for legitimate business reasons. In tax decisions, as in all statutory cases, Hand returned to the intent of the original legislation; and his opinions became a valuable guide to tax administrators.<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=26–30.}} See also, {{Harvnb|Chirelstein|1998}}, "Learned Hand's Contribution to the Law of Tax Avoidance".</ref> Hand's landmark decision in ''[[United States v. Aluminum Company of America]]'' in 1945 proved a powerful influence on the development of [[Competition law|antitrust law]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith|1973|pp=32–34}}; {{Harvnb|Schick|1970| pp=170–71, 188.}} In this case, the Second Circuit took the place of the Supreme Court, which could not raise a [[quorum]], and Hand's opinion set the standard for future rulings.</ref> In addition, his decisions in [[patent]], [[copyright]], and [[admiralty law| admiralty]] cases have contributed to the development of law in those fields. Though Hand was publicly known for his views on the great issues of constitutional law, his legacy as a commercial judge is also acknowledged within the legal profession.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970| p=188}}</ref> Hand's role as a founding member of the [[American Law Institute]], an organisation of scholars and practitioners devoted to clarifying and simplifying the law, lent his authority to lasting doctrinal guidelines and restatements of the law, such as those in the [[Model Penal Code]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffith| 1973| pp=43–44}}; {{Harvnb|Gunther| 1994| pp=410–14.}} For example, in 1955, Hand was influential in the [[American Law Institute]]'s decision to remove [[sodomy]] (along with [[adultery]]) from the list of crimes against the state. In the debate, he argued that sodomy was "a matter of morals, a matter very largely of taste, and it is not a matter that people should be put in prison about".</ref> After Hand's lectures and publications became widely known, his influence reached courts throughout the country.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970| p=189}}</ref> On the occasion of Hand’s seventy-fifth birthday on [[27 January]] [[1947]], ''[[The Washington Post]]'' suggested that he <blockquote>probably more than any other American jurist still active on the bench, typifies the spirit of sincere and open-minded inquiry into the facts and detached formulation of judgements on the basis of those facts … He has won recognition as a judges’ judge. His opinions command respect wherever our law extends, not because of his standing in the judicial hierarchy, but because of the clarity of thought and the cogency of reasoning that shape them.</blockquote> To the wider public, who knew little of his legal work, Hand was by then a folk hero.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gunther|1994|p=550}}</ref> [[Social scientist]] Marvin Schick has pointed out that his mythical status is [[paradox|paradoxical]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|p=12}}</ref> Because Hand never served on the Supreme Court, the majority of his cases were routine and his judgments rooted in precedent. On Hand’s retirement in 1951, [[Felix Frankfurter]] predicted that his "actual decisions will be all deader than the Dodo before long, as at least many of them are already".<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970| pp=154, 187}}</ref> Hand's non-promotion itself became part of the legend.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970|pp=13, 19}}</ref> Working for a lower court saved him from the taint of political controversy that often hung over the Supreme Court, where his contribution would have been diluted. Hand's eloquence as a writer, evident from his carefully worded opinions and published writings, played a larger part in the spread of his influence than did the substance of his decisions. Schick believes that the Hand myth brushes over contradictions in his legal philosophy. Hand's reputation as a libertarian—even an [[judicial activism|activist]]—judge, obscures the fact that by his own admission he was cautious, both in character and in judgement. Though a liberal, he regarded the advancement of civil liberties as the responsibility of the legislature, not of the courts. In his 1958 Holmes Lectures, he voiced uneasiness about the constitutionality of the [[Warren Court]]'s [[civil rights]] rulings.<ref>{{Harvnb|Schick|1970| p=355}}; {{Harvnb|Auerbach|1977|p=259}}</ref> This philosophy of judicial restraint failed to influence the decisions of the Supreme Court either in his lifetime or afterwards, and its implications were overlooked by most of his libertarian admirers.<ref>{{Harvnb| Schick|1970| p=155}}; {{Harvnb|Dworkin|1996|p=343}}</ref>. ==List of selected works== *{{citation | last=Hand |first = Learned | title = Liberty | place= Stamford, CT | publisher = Overbrook | year= 1941 | oclc= 2413475}}. *{{citation | last=Hand |first = Learned | editors = Irving Dilliard | title = The Spirit of Liberty: Papers and Addresses of Learned Hand |place=New York | publisher= Knopf | year=1952 | oclc=513793}}. *{{citation | last=Hand |first = Learned | title= The Bill of Rights | place=Cambridge, MA | publisher= Harvard University Press |year= 1958 |oclc = 418364 }}. (Oliver Wendell Holmes Lectures) *{{citation | last=Hand |first = Learned | editors = Hershel Shanks | title= The Art and Craft of Judging: The Decisions of Judge Learned Hand | place= New York | publisher= Macmillan | year= 1968 | oclc= 436539 }}. ==Notes== {{reflist|3}} ==References== *{{citation |last= Auerbach|first= Jerold S.| title= Unequal Justice: Lawyers and Social Change in Modern America |place= Oxford|publisher= Oxford University Press |year= 1977 |isbn= 0195021703}}. *{{citation | last= Carrington| first= Paul| title= Stewards of Democracy: Law as Public Profession | place= New York| publisher= Basic Books | year= 1999 |isbn= 0813368324}}. *{{citation | last = Chirelstein | first = Marvin | year = 1968 | month = January | title = Learned Hand’s Contribution to the Law of Tax Avoidance | journal = Yale Law Journal | volume = 77 | issue = 3 | pages = 440–474}} ([http://www.jstor.org/stable/794940 JSTOR] subscription required for online access). *{{citation | last= Dworkin| first= Ronald| title= Freedom's Law: The Moral Reading of the American Constitution | place= Oxford| publisher= Oxford University Press | year= 1996 |isbn= 0198264704}}. *{{citation | last= Griffith| first= Kathryn| title= Judge Learned Hand and the Federal Judiciary | place= Norman| publisher= Oklahoma University Press | year= 1973 |isbn= 0806110716}}. *{{citation | last = Gunther | first = Gerald | title = Learned Hand: The Man and the Judge | year = 1994 | publisher = Knopf | place = New York | isbn =039458807X}}. *{{citation | last = Horwitz | first = Morton J. | title = The Transformation of American Law 1870–1960| year = 1995 | publisher = Oxford University Press| place = Oxford | isbn = 0195092597}}. *{{citation | last = Irons | first = Peter | title = A People's History of the Supreme Court | year = 1999 | publisher = Viking Penguin | place = New York | isbn = 0-670-87006-4}}. *{{citation | last = Polenberg | first = Richard| title = &nbsp;'A Conservative among Liberals, and a Liberal among Conservatives': The Life of Learned Hand | year = 1995 |journal=Reviews in American History, Vol. 23| volume = 23|issue=2|pages=pp. 296–301}}. *{{citation | last = Rabban| first = David M. | title = Free Speech in Its Forgotten Years, 1870–1920 | year = 1999 | publisher = Cambridge University Press| place = Cambridge, UK | isbn = 0521655374}}. *{{citation | last= Schick | first= Marvin | title= Learned Hand's Court | place= Baltimore | publisher= Johns Hopkins Press | year= 1970 |isbn= 978-0801812149}}. *{{citation | last = Stettner| first = Edward A. | title = Shaping Modern Liberalism: Herbert Croly and Progressive Thought| year = 1993 | publisher = University Press of Kansas| place = Lawrence, KS| isbn = 0700605800}}. *{{citation | last = Stone | first = Geoffrey R. | title =Perilous Times: Free Speech in Wartime From the Sedition Act of 1798 to the War on Terrorism| year = 2004 | publisher = W.W. Norton & Co. | place = New York | isbn = 9780393058802 }}. *{{citation|editor-last=Vile |editor-first=John R.| title=Great American Judges: An Encyclopedia |volume=1| place= Santa Barbara|publisher= ABC–CLIO|year= 2003 |isbn=1576079899}}. *{{citation | last = Weinrib| first = Ernest J. | title = The Idea of Private Law | year = 1995 | publisher = Harvard University Press| place = Cambridge, MS | isbn= 0674442121}}. *{{citation | last = Westbrook| first = Robert B. | title = John Dewey and American Democracy | year = 1993 | publisher = Cornell University Press| place = Ithaca, NY | isbn=0801481112 }}. *{{citation | last = White| first = G. Edward | title = The American Judicial Tradition: Profiles of Leading American Judges| year = 2007 | publisher = Oxford University Press| place = Oxford | isbn = 0195139623}}. ==External links== {{wikiquote}} {{commonscat}} *{{citation |url=http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1064953| chapter=Learned Hand |last=Wade |first=Stephen |date= [[October 5]], [[1999]]| title=All Things Considered |publisher=NPR |accessdate= 2008-05-03}}. Includes excerpts of Learned Hand's recordings of folksongs for the [[Library of Congress]], part of a commercially released disc of American folksongs. {{DEFAULTSORT:Hand, Learned}} [[Category:Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]] [[Category:Judges of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York]] [[Category:Law and economics]] [[Category:Harvard Law School alumni]] [[Category:Harvard University alumni]] [[Category:People from Albany, New York]] [[Category:1872 births]] [[Category:1961 deaths]] [[fr:Learned Hand]] [[he:לרנד הנד]] [[nds:Learned Hand]] [[zh:勒恩德·汉德]]