In the state of Arizona, 16 judges and 21 lawyers and 2 law school deans were interviewed. The consensus is that Mr. Rehnquist possesses outstanding ability and that he is well qualified to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Among those who endorsed him were former political opponents as well as lawyers and judges who disagreed sharply with his political and philosophical views.

Those devoted to expanding concepts of civil rights regret his nomination, yet, a number of leading liberal and civil rights lawyers support the nomination because of his professional competence, intellectual ability, and character. As one of them summed it up, he had "total professional respect for Mr. Rehnquist." He had never known of any reproach to his character. He states he is "not a Bircher, not a racist, but a decent man and a good human being". Other leading lawyers speak of him as intellectually honest and intellectually objective.

Mr. Rehnquist also has substantial support from the Arizona law schools. Although within the faculties of the two law schools there are differences in political philosophy, neither of the deans believe that there was any degree of opposition to Mr. Rehnquist's appointment within their faculties.

In the states of Washington, Montana, Oregon, California, Nevada, and Idaho, 13 judges and 51 lawyers were interviewed and also the deans and faculty members of 28 law schools. Except for many of the Stanford alumni, Mr. Rehnquist was not known personally to most of those interviewed, but he was known by several and known by reputation to several more. With one exception, all comments regarding Mr. Rehnquist's professional qualifications were favorable. One judge although not personally acquainted with Mr. Rehnquist, had reservations as to his judicial temperament because of his impression that Mr. Rehnquist had such deep convictions on social and economic problems that he might be unduly and injudiciously influenced by those views in deciding cases. He believed, however, that in balance he was qualified for appointment. Others had reservations as to Mr. Rehnquist's personal views, but did not feel that this should disqualify him from appointment.

All of the deans interviewed recognized the high quality of Mr. Rehnquist's scholarship. Some acknowledged his conservatism, but felt that it did not affect his ability to be fair and open-minded. Among those to whom he was known only by reputation, some expressed the opinion that he might be "so far out of the main stream" with respect to human rights, that his qualifications were questionable; others had reservations as to temperament, but did not feel they rose to the level of disqualification.

One professor active in the civil rights movement said that he felt Mr. Rehnquist lacked the temperament of a Supreme Court Justice; that he was totally ruthless and in that sense lacked integrity. He felt that Mr. Rehnquist did not provide a full and balanced view to the Senate on what it wanted to know when he told the Senate that the Army did not give information to the Department of Justice in connection with surveillances. He felt that Mr. Rehnquist was gifted in his ability to make persuasive arguments but that he was not intellectually honest in making some of them.

Outside the Ninth Circuit, Mr. Rehnquist was known only a to relatively small fraction of the lawyers and judges interviewed, but he was known by persons of recognized standing in almost every circuit. Those who knew him personally uniformly believed him qualified for the Supreme Court. The adjectives "intelligent", "brilliant", "articulate", "rational", "forceful" recurred in their discussions. Those who knew him by reputation also spoke highly of his intellectual qualities, although some expressed reservations as to his political views. Two judges felt that his positions as to civil rights and civil liberties were too far out of step with the needs of the times.

Mr. Rehnquist is highly regarded by persons who observed his work in the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. He was diligent and hardworking. He advocated conservative viewpoints, but he nevertheless supported the Conference recommendations if he was outvoted.

Law schools

Of the 61 law schools surveyed, no dean, and as far as we know, no faculty member has cast doubt as to Mr. Rehnquist's brilliant intellectual qualifications. Our impression from our survey is that a strong preponderance of this group favors his confirmation, notwithstanding sharp opposition to many of his philosophical views. A significant minority would oppose his confirmation, not on grounds of professional qualifications, but on the broader question of the political desirability of so conservative an addition to the court.

A very small number suggests that his reiterated conservative views manifest a defect going to his professional qualifications. One of this group said he had no question about Rehnquist's intellectual capacity and personal characteristics, but that positions he had taken on the power of the executive to engage in surveillance of private activities, the publication of the Pentagon papers and the notion of preventive detention raise, in the aggregate, a question as to the soundness of his approach to the constitutional separation of powers.

CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES

Mr. Rehnquist has drawn criticism both for his public defense of various administration acts and recommendations which touch on the field of civil liberties and also for certain views he expressed before becoming a government officer which manifest an extremely conservative position as to appropriate governmental action in certain areas of racial and religious discrimination.

As to positions advocated by him in speeches and in committee hearings regarding such matters as preventive detention and government surveillance, the Committee reviewed a large number of his statements and concluded that regardless of the merits of the positions advocated, it did not appear that this defense of those positions was beyond proper limits of professional advocacy.

As to the positions he espoused before becoming a government officer, such as his opposition to proposed local and state legislation forbidding discrimination in places of public accommodation, his views were obviously conservative, but they were expressed on philosophical grounds and concerned only the merits of pending legislation. When the legislation was enacted, Mr. Rehnquist in no way attempted to frustrate or oppose the enforcement of the law and, indeed, he now acknowledges that its successful execution convinces him that his position was probably wrong on the merits.

Members of the Committee have also spoken with representatives of labor and civil rights groups concerning Mr. Rehnquist. This includes the AFL-CIO, the NAACP, the Americans for Democratic Action and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights. The Committee has been informed that many, if not all, of these groups are opposed to the confirmation of Mr. Rehnquist. As with respect to other objections to the nominee already noted, the reasons advanced for the opposition of these groups so far as the Committee has been informed, lie outside the area with which the Committee is concerned and to which its opinion is confined.

CONCLUSION

The Committee's investigation of Mr. Rehnquist was commenced on Friday, October 22, 1971, and this report was prepared on November 2, 1971. If further facts are learned which are significant, our Committee would ask for the privilege of submitting a supplemental report to deal with them.

As we stated at the outset, our Committee expresses no view whatever as to Mr. Rehnquist's personal and philosophical views. We have concluded that they do not affect his professional qualifications, that is, his professional competence, judicial temperament and integrity. Accordingly, the Committee is unanimous in its view that he is qualified for appointment to the Supreme Court. A majority of nine is of the opinion that he is one of the best qualified available and thus meets high standards of professional competence, judicial temperament, and integrity. The minority would not oppose the nomination, but is not ready to express this high degree of support.

Respectfully submitted.

LAWRENCE E. WALSH, Chairman.

Hon. JAMES O. EASTLAND,
New Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION,

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL JUDICIARY,
November 2, 1971.

DEAR SENATOR: The Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary of the American Bar Association submits herewith its report regarding Louis F. Powell. Our Committee, with respect to nominations for the Supreme Court limits its conclusions to the professional competence, judicial temperament, and integrity of the nominee. The Committee believes that without these characteristics no person is qualified to become a Justice of the Supreme Court. We recognize, however, that in the selection of a person for the Supreme Court by the President, and the consideration of that selection by the Senate, there are involved other factors of a broad political and ideological nature. Because the Committee does not take these factors into account, it wishes to make clear that it expresses no opinion on them, even though as will appear from what follows, its investigation revealed opposition from several sources to this nomination on that score. The Committee respects opinions on these factors on both sides; it does not attempt to evaluate them except to the extent, if any, that they appear to affect the element of judicial temperament.

The present unanimous conclusion of the Committee, limited to the area described above, is that Mr. Powell meets high standards of professional competence, judicial temperament, and integrity. To the Committee, this means that, from the viewpoint of professional qualifications, Mr. Powell is one of the best persons available for appointment to the Supreme Court.

EDUCATION

Mr. Powell received his B.S. from Washington and Lee University in 1929 and his LL.B. in 1931. He ranked first in his law school class. He was a campus leader and has the high respect of those who knew him as a student and as an alumnus. He is presently a Trustee of Washington and Lee University.

EXPERIENCE

Since 1937 Mr. Powell has been a partner of the firm of Hunton, Williams, Gay, Powell & Gibson. This firm is one of the leading firms in the State of Virginia and Mr. Powell is regarded as one of the leading lawyers of Virginia. His practice has embraced extensive litigation experience as well as other fields of professional activity. He is a director of a dozen important corporations and also serves as a trustee, member of the Executive Committee and general counsel of Colonial Williamsburg, Inc.

PUBLIC OFFICES

From 1952 to 1961 he served as Chairman of the Richmond Public Schools Board. From 1962 to 1969 he was a member of the Virginia Board of Education. As Chairman of Richmond Public Schools Board he is credited with a substantial contribution to the peaceful desegregation of the Richmond School system.

PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES

Mr. Powell has been active in the American Bar Association since 1941. He served as a member of many committees and as chairman of several. After service in the House of Delegates and on the Board of Governors, he was elected president of the American Bar Association for the year 1964-65. He has served as president of the American Bar Foundation since 1969 and as president of the American College of Trial Lawyers for the year 1969-70. Mr. Powell's presidency of the American Bar is remembered as a year of significant achievement. The uniform and undeviating comment of those who worked with him and knew him in this position emphasizes his courtesy, temperance and effectiveness.

One hundred thirty-two lawyers and judges were interviewed in the seven states of the Fourth Circuit. In addition, seven law school deans were asked for their own views and to the extent possible the views of their faculties. The Comments received can only be described as unrestricted enthusiasm for Mr. Powell. He has

received in most eloquent and emphatic terms the highest possible praise of the members of the profession who have known him and worked with him.

The law school faculties to the extent that their sentiment could be quickly obtained through the seven law school deans we interviewed are delighted with the President's choice. They regard him as moderate, temperate and extremely able-a most promising appointment to the Court.

The comments run the range of conceivable compliments-"absolutely tops in integrity, forthrightness, candor and fairness," "a superb human being,' "one of our most capable individual practioners," "a sensible conservative,' "one of the finest lawyers and men I have ever known," "in every respect a great lawyer,' "an example of selection based upon professional excellence," "a perfect gentleman and a distinguished scholar."

The cross-section of lawyers interviewed included lawyers from all specialties including those deeply committed to the area of civil rights. Only two adverse comments were received. One lawyer critizicized Mr. Powell's firm for not having employed black lawyers and for its participation in the Prince Edward County school desegregation case. Another active civil rights lawyer expressed opposition to Mr. Powell's conservatism. This lawyer's partner, who is equally active in the civil rights matters has expressed his support for Mr. Powell.

In part because of his American Bar Association relationships, but to a substantial degree he has been active in practice outside his own circuit, Mr. Powell was well know throughout the country. Every one of those in a position to express an opinion expressed approval of his nomination. Many did so in terms of almost unrestrained admiration-"one of the best lawyers in the country," "always a leader, quiet and forceful," "calm and restrained," "it would be difficult to find a more qualified appointee," "extraordinarily able person and a fine lawyer with great intellectual talent and capacity," "one of the ten best qualified men in the country," "a moderate but not a reactionary," "an intellectual with judicial temperament," "an outstanding lawyer, his integrity is beyond reproach, he has perfect temperament for the position."

A significant number of lawyers and judges stated that Mr. Powell was their first choice for appointment. Others stated that although they disagree with his political philosophy, they were completely satisfied that he would have a "sound and lawyer-like approach to all questions."

Some of the law school faculties expressed regret or lack of enthusiasm because of Mr. Powell's conservatism but in most leading law schools the opinion was strongly favorable. For example, one scholar stated that there was no question as to his ability, that he was extraordinarily conscientious, that he was always prepared to reconsider his own viewpoints, that although he was traditionally conservative he was very fair and had a true breadth of outlook. Other comments from the law schools were: "A man of size who has humility, and depth and breadth of experience," "appointment is ideal," "highest calibre as a man and as a lawyer," "brilliant lawyer, level-headed, learned and a moderate."

CIVIL LIBERTIES

Members of the Committee have also spoken with representatives of labor and civil rights groups concerning Mr. Powell. This includes the AFL-CIO, the NAACP, the Americans for Democratic Action and Leadership Conference on Civil Rights. We have been informed that these groups are not opposed to Mr. Powell's confirmation.

CONCLUSION

It is the unanimous view of our Committee that Mr. Powell meets, in an exceptional degree, high standards of professional competence, judicial temperament and integrity and that he is one of the best qualified lawyers available for appointment to the Supreme Court.

Respectfully submitted,

LAWRENCE E. WALSH, Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. I will also place in the record the biography of the nominee.

Mr. Rehnquist, is it correct?

Mr. REHNQUIST. It is correct, I believe, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. It will be placed in the record.

(The biography referred to follows.)

Name: William H. Rehnquist; Born: October 1, 1924, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Marital Status: Married, 3 children (Wife: Natalie Cornell).

Education: Stanford University, Stanford, California, 1948 B.A. degree, 1952 LL.B. degree. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 1950 M.A. degree. Bar: 1952, District of Columbia; 1954, State of Arizona.

Military Service: Mar. 4, 1943-Apr. 10, 1946 U.S. Army Air Force; Sergeant when discharged.

Employment: Jan. 26, 1952-July 18, 1953 Law clerk to Associate Justice Robert H. Jackson, U.S. Supreme Court. July 18, 1953-Oct. 1, 1955 Evans, Kitchel and Jenckes, Phoenix, Ariz. Oct. 1, 1955-Jan. 1, 1957 Private practice with Keith Ragan, Phoenix, Ariz. Jan. 1, 1957-Jan. 1, 1960 Cunningham, Messenger, Carson and Elliott, Phoenix, Ariz. Partner. Jan. 1, 1960-Feb. 1, 1969 Powers and Rehnquist, Phoenix, Ariz. Feb. 1, 1969-Present U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, Assistant Attorney General. Office: United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. Home: 7004 Arbor Lane, McLean, Va.

To Be: Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

The CHAIRMAN. A resolution from the State Bar of Arizona and other letters will also be placed in the record.

(The material referred to follows.)

Hon. JAMES EASTLAND,

Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

STATE BAR OF ARIZONA, Phoenix, Ariz., October 26, 1971.

SIR: I have enclosed a resolution of the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Arizona strongly endorsing the nomination and appointment of William H. Rehnquist as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The State Bar of Arizona is greatly honored by Mr. Rehnquist's nomination and would like to be on record as enthusiastically supporting his appointment.

Should your committee request appearances in connection with its consideration of Mr. Rehnquist's nomination, a representative of the State Bar of Arizona would be honored to appear on behalf of Mr. Rehnquist's appointment. Sincerely,

HOWARD H. KARMAN, President.

RESOLUTION

Whereas, Mr. William H. Rehnquist, a member of the State Bar of Arizona, has been nominated by the President of the United States as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate; and

Whereas, Mr. Rehnquist has continually demonstrated the very highest degree of professional competence and integrity and devotion to the ends of justice both in the State of Arizona and the United States of America; therefore,

it is