Joseph P. Bradley

BRADLEY, JOSEPH P.

Joseph P. Bradley was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1870 in a successful move by President ULYSSES S. GRANT to pack the court, or fill vacancies on the bench with jurists who supported the president’s actions. Grant nominated Bradley and fellow Republican WILLIAM STRONG with the almost public understanding that they would save the invalidated Legal Tender Act (12 Stat. 345, 532, 709). As expected, Bradley and Strong voted to uphold the constitutionality of the act. Bradley went on to serve as an associate justice for 22 years and, as was the custom, as a traveling circuit judge for the Fifth (Southern) Circuit.

The eldest of 11 children, JOSEPH BRADLEY
was born March 14, 1813, in Berne, New York,
and raised on a farm. He was given no middle
name at birth; his middle initial was likely an
expansion he made of his name to honor his
father. He relied on his intelligence, ambition,
and strong work ethic to make a name for himself
in the legal profession. An 1836 graduate of
New Jersey’s Rutgers College, Bradley was a selftaught
lawyer who was admitted to the New Jersey
bar in 1839. In 1859, he received an honorary
law degree from Lafayette College, in Easton,
Pennsylvania.
Bradley’s marriage to Mary Hornblower
helped to open doors in the legal community.
His wife’s father, WILLIAM HORNBLOWER, was
chief justice of the New Jersey Supreme Court.
Bradley built a successful law practice with a
large business clientele that included the troubled
Camden and Amboy Railroad. His expertise
was in patent and COMMERCIAL LAW.
Bradley’s appointment to the Supreme
Court on February 7, 1870 came shortly after
the Court ruled that the Legal Tender Act was
unconstitutional. In 1862, Congress had used the act to issue treasury notes as a substitute for
gold in its efforts to pay off Civil War debts.
Upon reviewing the legislation, the Supreme
Court invalidated the issuance of the paper
money, in Hepburn v. Griswold, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.)
603, 19 L. Ed. 513 (1870) (the first of what
became known as the Legal Tender Cases).
Court observers predicted that Grant’s new
appointees would agree to reverse Hepburn
because of their long-standing ties to commercial
interests. They were right: Bradley and
Strong did vote to overturn, thereby upholding
the legality of the notes (Knox v. Lee, and Parker
v. Davis, 79 U.S. [12 Wall.] 457, 20 L. Ed. 287
[1871], heard concurrently).
Bradley’s Supreme Court and circuit court
opinions often fail the test of time. Although his
contemporaries praised him for his keen intellect
and legal acumen, many of his decisions are,
by today’s standards, objectionable in outcome
and reasoning.
For example, Bradley wrote the majority
opinion in the infamous CIVIL RIGHTS CASES,
109 U.S. 3, 3 S. Ct. 18, 27 L. Ed. 835 (1883),
which declared the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT of 1875
(18 Stat. 336) unconstitutional. The Civil Rights
Act was established to ensure the equal treatment
of African-Americans in public facilities
and accommodations. In effect, that decision
sanctioned racial SEGREGATION and paved the
way for discriminatory JIM CROW LAWS.
According to the Court, civil rights legislation
could not prevent discrimination by private
individuals. Although the THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT
of the U.S. Constitution outlawed SLAVERY,
and the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT barred
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION by states, discrimination
by private citizens was allowable, according
to the Court. Bradley argued that prejudice was
not amenable to legislation. If private business
owners refused to serve or accommodate
African-Americans, Congress could not force
them to do so. In this view, purely private conduct
was not covered by the post-Civil War constitutional
amendments.
In a famous dissent, Associate Justice JOHN
MARSHALL HARLAN pointed out that because
the restaurants, inns, theaters, and hotels owned
by private citizens are actually quite public, discrimination
against African-Americans in these
places should not be tolerated. Harlan’s dissent
was later used to bolster support for the CIVIL
RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 (42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000 et
seq.).
In Bradwell v. Illinois, 83 U.S. (16 Wall.) 130,
21 L. Ed. 442 (1872), Bradley concurred in the
decision to reject Myra Bradwell’s bid to practice
law in Illinois. Bradwell had studied law with her
husband and had passed the Illinois bar examination.
However, Illinois denied her ADMISSION
TO THE BAR because she was female. Bradwell
appealed her case to the U.S. Supreme Court,
claiming that the Fourteenth Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution protected her right to practice
in her chosen profession. The Supreme Court
ruled otherwise. Bradley wrote in concurring
dicta that God had created woman to be wife
and mother, not lawyer.
In the SLAUGHTER-HOUSE CASES, 83 U.S. (16
Wall.) 36, 21 L. Ed. 394 (1873), Bradley’s dissent
foretold the Court’s changing philosophy on
DUE PROCESS for businesses. In those cases,
Louisiana butchers objected to a state law that
allowed only one company to slaughter cattle in
New Orleans. The Court sided with the state,
but Bradley’s dissent was later used to argue for
the protection of commercial enterprises from
state government intrusion.
Bradley was chosen in 1877 to sit on the
Hayes-Tilden Electoral Commission to determine
the results of the presidential election
between Republican candidate RUTHERFORD B.
HAYES and his Democratic opponent, SAMUEL J.
TILDEN. Bradley was the swing vote; he replaced
Justice DAVID DAVIS, a political independent
who could not fulfill his term on the electoral
commission. Bradley had voted for Hayes, his
fellow Republican.
Bradley died in Washington, D.C., on January
22, 1892, at the age of 79.
FURTHER READINGS
Collins, Michael C. 1996. “Justice Bradley’s Civil Rights
Odyssey Revisited.” Tulane Law Review 70 (June):
1979–2002.
Congressional Quarterly. 1989. Guide to the U.S. Supreme
Court. 2d ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly.
Cushman, Claire. 1993. The Supreme Court Justices: Illustrated
Biographies, 1789–1993. Washington, D.C.: Congressional
Quarterly.
Lurie, Jonathan. 1986.“Mr. Justice Bradley: A Reassessment.”
Seton Hall Law Review 16 (spring): 343–75.