Justice Jackson’s Square Deal

His Judicial Opinions Through the Lens of His 1940 Speech

By Michael J. Caggianelli 

Michael J. Caggianelli is a 2025 graduate of Albany Law School. Before attending law school, he earned a bachelor’s degree in Criminal Justice from the University at Albany, SUNY. He also worked as a student research assistant at the Office of the New York State Attorney General, aiding staff members at the Robert Abrams Law Library in downtown Albany.

During law school, Michael was accepted into the Government Law Review as a subeditor. The following year, he was selected to serve on the journal’s editorial board as an Article Editor. He also interned twice at the Saratoga County District Attorney’s Office, the second time as a student in the Domestic Violence Prosecution Hybrid (DVPH) Clinic. Following these experiences, Michael interned at the New York State Education Department’s Office of Professional Discipline (OPD) and collaborated with attorneys from the New York State Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence (OPDV).

Following the bar examination, Michael will begin his legal career as an Assistant District Attorney at the Saratoga County District Attorney’s Office.

In 1940, U.S. Attorney General Robert H. Jackson gave an address titled “A Square Deal for the Court.” At the time, critics of the Supreme Court were concerned that the justices were frequently overturning precedent and increasingly lenient towards the policies of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Jackson was critical of the idea that the Court was becoming “Roosevelt’s Court,” or that overturning precedent was a problem to be fixed. Instead, he argued that overturning previous decisions could be a positive development if new rulings brought US jurisprudence closer to the words of the Constitution.

Jackson would soon receive an opportunity to influence federal jurisprudence and address his concerns with judicial decision-making. Upon his appointment as an Associate Justice, Jackson quickly established himself as a strong adherent to constitutional principles. He authored numerous opinions, many of which remain relevant in the modern era.

This paper seeks to examine a few of his most influential judicial writings through the statements uttered in “A Square Deal for the Court” to accomplish two goals: 1) to determine whether Jackson’s jurisprudence remained consistent with his previously expressed views, and 2) further explore his attitude towards the role of the judiciary.

_____________________

To read the paper, open HERE.