One of the characteristics that distinguished Brandeis from his contemporaries was his ardent embrace of Zionism. He also analyzes significant cases which came before the court during the twenty-three years ( 1916 – 39) Brandeis served on the Supreme Court, and he further provide a fascinating view of how widely Brandeis influenced society in the chapters focused on “Extrajudicial Activities.” Bush’s claim of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Americans expected their presidents, if not to tell the truth, at least not to lie to them.” Yet he also cautions against interpreting his subject’s actions and opinions through contemporary eyes, since Brandeis “lived in a particular time and place.” Such a perspective helps the modern reader comprehend Brandeis, but Urofsky does more than merely depict his subject’s life experiences.

For example, in citing Brandeis’ letter to his brother to convey his feelings about President William Howard Taft (“The situation is now pretty tense and my disgust for the administration is now unbounded”), Urofsky adds, “In an era before the likes of Richard Nixon’s Watergate or George W. Urofsky contrasts many of Brandeis’ activities and achievements with our experiences in the modern era.

But it is “the high moral standards he demanded of those in public life,” and Brandeis’ highly moral personal behavior, that enlighten the reader. He describes the diverse elements in Brandeis’ life and career, as a major contributor to the development of both the theory and the practice of law, as a visionary labor arbitrator, as a trusted adviser to Presidents, as a respected Zionist leader, and of course as a Supreme Court Justice whose opinions and in particular his dissents became part of constitutional dialogue and often institutionalized as law. Urofsky’s admiration for Brandeis is evident in his comprehensive biography, Louis D. Brandeis was an exception, for his legacy was based also on his distinguished extra-legal activities. Selection of a new Supreme Court member over the past thirty years often demonstrated how fraught with controversy and competition between political parties the process is. Confirming the President’s nominee has been relatively unremarkable, yet it has been rare for a new Justice to develop so enduring a record that it influences the future.

Louis D. Brandeis by Melvin I. Urofsky