Worst 10 Supreme Court Justices

Mr. Beat counts down his ten least favorite Supreme Court justices in American history. Who do YOU think is the worst Supreme Court justice ever?

His favorite justices:

Dishonorable mentions:
Melville Fuller
Rufus Peckham
Sherman Minton
Owen Roberts
Samuel Chase
Henry Baldwin

Here is where you can get his Supreme Court book:

Produced by Matt Beat and Beat Productions, LLC. All images/video by Matt Beat, found in the public domain, or used under fair use guidelines. Music by @ElectricNeedleRoom (Mr. Beat's band), @badsnacks, Yung Logos, and Otis McDonald.

Additional sources/further reading:

Join this channel to get access to perks:

For business inquiries or to send snail mail to Mr. Beat:

How to support and donate to my channel:
Subscribe to @iammrbeat & hit the notification bell 🔔
Subscribe to my second channel: The Beat Goes On

Connect with me:

Merch:

Affiliate Links:

#supremecourt #scotus #usgovernment

Since 1790, there have been 116 justices in the Supreme Court, but these ten, more than all others, have tarnished its legacy.

Chapters:
0:00 Introduction
1:53 Sponsor (Bright Cellars)
3:18 Second introduction
3:35 Henry Billings Brown
4:35 Lewis Powell
5:47 Stephen Johnson Field
7:19 Clarence Thomas
8:52 John Archibald Campbell
10:39 John Catron
11:42 James Wayne
12:34 Peter Vivan Daniel
13:33 James McReynolds
16:15 Roger Taney
17:42 Conclusion

[iammrbeat]

Who do YOU think was the worst Supreme Court justice in American history?
Do you disagree with any of my picks?
Who should have been on this list but was not?

Here are my (dis)honorable mentions:
Dishonorable mentions:
Melville Fuller
Rufus Peckham
Sherman Minton
Owen Roberts
Samuel Chase
Henry Baldwin
Samuel Alito

[mam]

Fun fact: as Chief Justice in 1861, Taney had the job of inaugurating Abraham Lincoln. That had to be pretty awkward for both of them.

[bigkkm]

Adding a sitting Justice is a bold move. I approve.

[MrAlegeniale]

Not from the US, but here in Bolivia we once had a Supreme Court Justice who took his decisions and made his rulings based on reading the Bolivian equivalent of tarot cards.

[grain]

Still remains insane to me that 9 people can just flagrantly change the law based on things they like that goes against any principles they demonstrate and remain in that seat for life no matter what they say or how senile they become

[ericscooby]

Mr Beat: personally, I don't support murder
Background crowd: awwwhhhh

[PopeLando]

Because of a string of single-term Presidents and two deaths, Roger Taney also holds the record for number of Presidents he swore into office. He was of course the only name on this list I'd even heard of, and I wasn't surprised that he was no.1.

[Ron-qeul]

The middle school I went to was originally name after Roger Taney. It was renamed after Thurgood Marshall

[neilchace]

Video Idea: Ten Worst Supreme Court Decisions in US History.

[interstatehighwayfan_]

I pretended to be clearance Thomas on twitter and people believed me

[Nicksonian]

A prominent statue of Roger B. Taney was erected in front of the Maryland Statehouse in 1872. It wasn’t removed until 2017. It was certainly about time. When I first moved to Annapolis in 1986, I remember thinking, “what the hell is THAT doing there?!”

[jefft]

Glad to see Taney at Number 1. That Dred Scott quote is one I use with students all the time

[arisafari]

The fact that none of those judges who opined that Japanese internment was okay are on this list really says something about US history

[everett]

Haven't watched it yet but I respect the move of not being afraid to add a contemporary justice, I'll watch and make my own judgment on if it was deserved or not though.

[hakeemfullerton]

I had a feeling that taney would be number one, but the stuff you said about number two made a good enough case for him to be number one

Also the fact he died alone and the Justices didn't attend his funeral feels very poetic

[charliesmith]

I think you've done a great job. I would just add a comment about Charles Whittaker, an Eisenhower appointee who served five years exactly. He was one of the few justices who was considered incompetent by almost everyone including himself. During the time he served, 1957-1962, there were several close critical cases in which he was the swing vote including Baker v. Carr, the apportionment case, which had to be held over from year to year for him to make up his mind. Finally he had a "nervous breakdown" over Baker, was hospitalized and resigned from the court.

[luanovalunosis]

I applaud you for putting a sitting Justice in this video. Clarence Thomas is incredibly corrupt and a large reason why most people today feel very sour about SCOTUS. Completely agree with where you placed him.

[mashy]

Congratulations on the 2 billion view video with 5 academy awards nominations Mr Beat! Keep it up!

[brianpratt]

You should do the top 10 mediocre justices.

[alonkatz]

That's an interesting list. I can't say I'm not suprised many of these justices voted for the Dred Scott decision (bless Justices McLean and Curtis for being decent, reasonable people by dissenting in that case). However I disagree about Justice Thomas. I would have put him higher on the list, and here are the things he did on the bench to justify it:

1. Voted to stop the count in Florida in the 2000 presidential election, violating the separation of the three branches of government as well as the separation between the federal government and the states, despite being a pro-states rights judge (Bush v. Gore).

2. Ruled that racial gerrymandering was unconstitutional, but refused to do the same for partisan gerrymandering (compare Shaw v. Reno to Rucho v. Common Cause).

3. Argued that the AUMF granted the president absolute power to act in the name of fighting terrorism, which the founding fathers definitely did NOT intend in any capacity (Hamdi v. Rumsfeld).

4. Argued multiple times that constitutional rights did not apply to minors, because that's what the founding fathers thought (Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.). This is especially peculiar, because Thomas had no issues granting constitutional rights to corporations, despite it no evidence that the founding fathers believed it should have been the case (Citizens United v. FEC).

5. Granted certiorari to a case that attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election, despite petitioners clearly having no legal standing (Texas v. Pennsylvania).

6. Failed to recuse himself in a case concerning the 1/6 attack on the Captiol despite his wife, a close acquaintance of President Trump, helping organize the attack in the first place. He was the only Justice to grant certiorari to said case (Trump v. Thompson).

7. Argued that the court should consider overturning its precedents on LGBT right, same sex marriage and contraceptives (Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization). Curiously, he did not mention interracial marriage, despite it and same-sex marriage relying on the same legal basis (compare Loving v. Virginia to Obergefell v. Hodges). Maybe it's because his wife, Ginni, is white?

8. In that same case, ruled that precedent could be overturned if it were "egregiously wrong", while adding no definition for what counts as such. This means, as the dissent rightly said, that the court can overturn any precedent with no further explanation.

9. Ignored evidence that clearly contradicted the majority opinion (Kennedy v. Bremerton School District). Bless Justice Sotomayor for adding said evidence, photographs of the event argued on in the case, in her dissent.

10. Vocally supported the Independent Legislature Theory, a theory that has no basis in U.S. law (which is funny considering Justice Thomaz believes originalism is the only way to interpret the consider) that claims that the state legislatures have the sole authority over federal elections. Later, when the theory was argued on at the Supreme Court (after he granted certiorari to the case), he dissented, cowardly and shamelessly arguing that there was no need to even argued there was no need to decide on tbe case, because the by that point, the lower court had already reversed the decision (Moore v. Harper). I guess he didn't want to be caught siding against democracy and stuff!

-11. Ruled in favor of a case where respondents had no legal standing (303 Creative LLC v. Elenis). In this case, the court struck down a colorado law that banned discrimination against same-sex couples. The problem was that the complain that was filed to the Colorado government that started the whole case was not filed under the person listed in it. The person who "filed that complaint" turned out to be straigt, married to a woman and a father who didn't even know his name was used for the case. Therefore, there was no real injury inflicted by the petitioner, and the respondents had no reason to even file the lawsuit (perhaps the person who really filed the complaint was the petitioner herself?).-

Edit: I think I was wrong about no. 11. My bias got to me on this one. You win this time, Justice Thomas.