Epstein Secrets

tion of JFK, to the forced resignation of Richard Nixon, to the Chappaquiddick investigation of Ted Kenne

never I visited—then as a full participant). The first time I went to Kronheim’s for lunch, we picked up two justices at the Supreme Court building: William O. Douglas and William Brennan. I had previously met Justice Brennan through his son Bill, who was my law school classmate and moot court partner. Justice Brenn

ur legal team not been successful in stopping the Nixon Admuinistration’s efforts to deport Lennon on tru

h Court dismissed the case as moot, thus postponing the decision as to whether it would uphold race-specific affirmative action programs. But Justice William O. Douglas, probably the 57 DeFunis v. Odegaard, 416 U.S. 312 (1974). 291 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017378 4.2.12 WC: 191694 court’s most liberal member at the time,

ve to confront the ultimate issue. But it was not the same Court that had been sitting when the strategy was originally devised; there were four new Nixon appointees, and it was clear that at least some of them believed the death penalty to be constitutional. The umpires — if not the rules — had been ch

rari in Rudolph v. Alabama (1963)—a case involving imposition of the death penalty on a black man who was convicted of raping a white woman. Justice William O. Douglas signed on as well. The dissenters invited the bar to address the following questions, which they deemed “relevant and worthy of argument and consider