This Day in Legal History: Louisiana Adopts State Constitution, McCarthy Dies, and Birmingham Campaign
On May 2, 1939, Louisiana adopted its current state constitution, known as the Louisiana Constitution of 1921, which at the time marked a significant overhaul of state governance. Though originally adopted in 1921, it underwent critical amendments and re-ratification processes culminating on this date to reflect broader federal constitutional principles, especially concerning civil rights and governance reforms. This version would go on to become one of the most amended constitutions in the U.S., highlighting Louisiana’s complex political and legal environment, particularly around issues of race, voting, and economic regulation.
On the federal level, on May 2, 1957, Senator Joseph McCarthy died, signaling the end of one of the most controversial chapters in American legal and political history. McCarthy had become the face of the post-war Red Scare, using Senate hearings and investigations to accuse numerous government officials and private citizens of Communist sympathies without substantial evidence. His tactics led to the coining of the term “McCarthyism,” representing the broader trend of reckless accusations without due process, a violation of basic legal protections. His downfall began with the 1954 Army-McCarthy hearings, where his aggressive questioning was televised, turning public opinion sharply against him.
Also on May 2, 1963, during the Birmingham Campaign, hundreds of African American children and teenagers marched in Birmingham, Alabama, as part of a civil rights strategy to provoke mass arrests and draw national attention to segregation. The police response, using dogs and fire hoses on peaceful demonstrators, shocked the nation and galvanized support for federal civil rights legislation. These events laid crucial groundwork for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which fundamentally altered American legal frameworks surrounding discrimination.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, never one to sugarcoat institutional danger, pulled no punches in a recent address where she warned that political attacks on the judiciary—particularly from Donald Trump and his orbit—aren’t just angry outbursts. They’re strategic. “Not random,” she emphasized, but seemingly calculated to chill the bench and warp the public’s view of judicial independence. Speaking in Puerto Rico at a judges’ conference, she framed the threats and harassment against judges as not merely inappropriate, but corrosive to democracy itself—an erosion of the rule of law masquerading as political speech.
While Jackson didn’t name Trump directly (a nod, perhaps, to judicial decorum), she acknowledged “the elephant in the room.” That elephant has been stomping around the judiciary for years, from defying court orders to demanding impeachments of judges who don't rule his way. Chief Justice John Roberts—no firebrand liberal—has already rebuked Trump this year for trying to undermine judicial authority. Jackson’s remarks, which reportedly drew a standing ovation, echoed deeper concerns among legal scholars about an impending constitutional crisis fueled by executive overreach and coordinated judicial delegitimization.
With a 6–3 conservative majority still holding firm on the Supreme Court, her comments are more than ideological protest. They’re a pointed reminder that the judiciary's legitimacy isn't just under rhetorical attack—it’s being targeted as a political obstacle. And in Jackson’s view, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
US Supreme Court Justice Jackson criticizes Trump's attacks on judges | Reuters
Donald Trump’s judicial conveyor belt is up and running again. Today, May 1, 2025, he announced his first federal judicial nominee since retaking the White House: Whitney Hermandorfer, a conservative legal operative from Tennessee who’s clerked for three sitting Supreme Court justices and currently works under the state’s Republican Attorney General. If confirmed, she’ll take a seat on the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals—a vacancy that lingered after Biden’s nominee stalled amid GOP opposition from Tennessee’s own senators.
Trump’s post on Truth Social didn’t mince words: Hermandorfer is a “Fighter,” a term that doubles as both a branding strategy and a judicial philosophy. Her resume backs that up—she’s defended Tennessee’s abortion ban and fought Biden-era protections for transgender students. Translation: she’s been in the legal trenches of the culture war and emerged as a reliable soldier for the right.
This nomination is the opening salvo in what could be a new wave of over 100 judicial appointments in Trump’s second term, offering him another shot at reshaping the federal bench after appointing 234 judges—including three Supreme Court justices—during his first. Hermandorfer is stepping into a seat vacated by Judge Jane Stranch, an Obama appointee, whose intended successor under Biden, Karla Campbell, never got her Senate vote thanks to a post-election deal between Democrats and Republicans to fast-track some trial court nominees at the cost of four appellate picks.
The judicial arms race is back. And this time, the Senate arithmetic—and the vacancies left behind—may tilt even harder in Trump’s favor.
Trump makes first judicial nomination since returning to White House | Reuters
Google’s legal team is headed to federal court Friday to plead with Judge Leonie Brinkema not to yank apart its advertising tech empire. At stake is nothing short of the future architecture of online advertising. The DOJ is pushing to force Google to divest key parts of its Google Ad Manager, including the ad exchange and publisher ad server—core infrastructure for monetizing digital content. Think of it as ripping out the plumbing from the internet’s ad economy.
Judge Brinkema has already ruled that Google unlawfully tied its ad server and ad exchange, leveraging its dominance in a way that stifled competition and hurt publishers. Not exactly a glowing endorsement of their market behavior. Still, Google insists that a forced breakup isn’t just excessive—it’s legally unjustified. Their position is these tools do more than just hawk banner ads, and the DOJ’s remedy would be a regulatory overreach.
In the backdrop is another case in D.C., where the DOJ is toying with the idea of making Google sell Chrome—the browser—over its search dominance. Google clearly doesn’t want a repeat of that nightmare here.
So, the message from Mountain View is clear: Let’s talk tweaks, not torpedoes. But Brinkema’s already signaled she sees systemic harm. Whether that translates into structural remedies—or just more behavioral promises—now depends on how persuasive Google’s lawyers can be without sounding like they’re defending a monopoly.
Google will seek to avoid ad tech spinoff in antitrust case | Reuters
This week’s closing theme brings us into the fiery imagination of Hector Berlioz, the 19th-century French composer who lived as intensely as he wrote. Berlioz was a Romantic through and through—equal parts visionary, dramatist, and eccentric. His music defied convention, his orchestration exploded boundaries, and his literary obsession with Goethe’s Faust gave rise to one of his most enigmatic and powerful works: La Damnation de Faust (The Damnation of Faust), completed in 1846.
Not quite an opera, not quite a cantata, Berlioz called it a "dramatic legend"—a hybrid form that suited his unconventional style and theatrical flair. Drawing from Gérard de Nerval’s French translation of Faust, the work traces the tortured scholar’s tragic arc: from existential despair, to enchanted pastoral scenes, to infernal damnation, all wrapped in Berlioz’s vivid orchestral color. Its fourth part, the “Ride to the Abyss” and “Pandemonium,” is especially striking—a blazing descent into hell that’s often performed independently, particularly around Walpurgis Night on April 30 and May 1, when tales of witches’ sabbaths and demonic revels echo the scene’s imagery.
At its premiere, The Damnation of Faust baffled audiences and bombed commercially, though it has since been recognized as one of Berlioz’s masterpieces, showcasing his flair for narrative, his taste for the macabre, and his unmatched orchestral daring. It remains a high watermark for musical storytelling without staging—and an apt closer for a week shadowed by ambition, unrest, and devilish bargains.
Without further ado, The Damnation of Faust, by Hector Berlioz. Enjoy!
Share this post