Owen Roberts

Owen Roberts
Born	Owen Josephus Roberts 5/2/1875
Birthplace	Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.
Died	5/17/1955 West Vincent Township, Pennsylvania, U.S.
Nationality	American
Occupation	Jurist, legal academic
Title	Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
Known for	Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court; Roberts Commission investigating the attack on Pearl Harbor; "the switch in time that saved nine"
Education	University of Pennsylvania (AB, LLB)
Children	1
Awards	Presidential Medal for Merit

Owen Josephus Roberts (May 2, 1875 – May 17, 1955) was an American jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court from 1930 to 1945. Appointed by President Herbert Hoover, Roberts occupied a pivotal position on the bench during one of the most turbulent periods in American constitutional history, serving as a swing vote between the Court's conservative and liberal blocs during the legal battles over President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal legislation. His vote in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish (1937), which upheld a state minimum wage law, became one of the most consequential judicial decisions of the twentieth century and was famously dubbed "the switch in time that saved nine." Beyond his judicial career, Roberts led two presidential commissions—one investigating the attack on Pearl Harbor and another focused on the protection of cultural monuments during World War II. After retiring from the Supreme Court, he served as Dean of the University of Pennsylvania Law School from 1948 to 1951. A man whose career spanned the prosecution of the Teapot Dome scandal, the constitutional crises of the New Deal era, and the wartime challenges of the 1940s, Roberts left a complex and debated legacy in American jurisprudence.

Early Life

Owen Josephus Roberts was born on May 2, 1875, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He was raised in the Germantown neighborhood of the city, where he attended Germantown Academy, a private preparatory school with roots dating to the colonial era. Roberts grew up in a middle-class family and demonstrated academic aptitude from an early age. His upbringing in Philadelphia, then one of the largest and most politically significant cities in the United States, provided him with exposure to the legal and civic institutions that would shape his career.

Roberts's early education at Germantown Academy prepared him well for higher studies. He was recognized as an intellectually gifted student and went on to pursue his undergraduate and legal education at the University of Pennsylvania, remaining close to his Philadelphia roots throughout his formative years.

Education

Roberts enrolled at the University of Pennsylvania, where he earned his Bachelor of Arts degree. He subsequently attended the University of Pennsylvania Law School, from which he received his Bachelor of Laws degree. During his time at the university, Roberts was elected to Phi Beta Kappa, the prestigious academic honor society, reflecting his strong scholarly performance. After completing his legal education, Roberts began his career in private practice and legal academia, initially serving as an instructor at his alma mater's law school while simultaneously building his reputation in the Philadelphia legal community.

Career

Early Legal Career and Teapot Dome

Following his graduation from law school, Roberts embarked on a legal career in Philadelphia. He worked as a district attorney in the city, gaining experience in prosecution and public service. He also maintained a connection to legal education, teaching at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. Roberts built a reputation as a capable and thorough attorney, which brought him to national attention during the 1920s.

In 1924, President Calvin Coolidge appointed Roberts as one of two special prosecutors to investigate the Teapot Dome scandal, one of the most significant political corruption cases in American history. The scandal involved the secret leasing of federal oil reserves at Teapot Dome in Wyoming and Elk Hills in California to private oil companies by Secretary of the Interior Albert B. Fall, who had received substantial bribes in return. Roberts, along with fellow special prosecutor Atlee Pomerene, conducted a rigorous investigation and prosecution that resulted in Fall's conviction—making him the first United States Cabinet member to be convicted of a crime committed while in office. Roberts's handling of the Teapot Dome prosecution established his national reputation as a man of integrity and legal acumen, and it would prove instrumental in his eventual nomination to the Supreme Court.

Roberts was also associated with the Philadelphia law firm Montgomery McCracken, which traces part of its history to his legal career in the city.

Nomination and Confirmation to the Supreme Court

The vacancy that led to Roberts's appointment arose from the death of Associate Justice Edward Terry Sanford on March 8, 1930. President Herbert Hoover initially nominated John J. Parker, a federal appeals court judge from North Carolina, to fill the seat. However, Parker's nomination met with strong opposition from organized labor and civil rights organizations, most notably the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), which objected to statements Parker had made regarding African American voting rights. The Senate rejected Parker's nomination by a vote of 41 to 39 on May 7, 1930.

Following Parker's defeat, Hoover moved quickly and nominated Roberts as his second choice for the vacancy on May 9, 1930. Roberts's nomination did not provoke the same degree of controversy. His reputation as the special prosecutor in the Teapot Dome case, combined with his professional standing in the Philadelphia legal community, made him an acceptable candidate to senators on both sides of the aisle. The Senate confirmed Roberts by a voice vote, and he took his seat on the Supreme Court on June 2, 1930.

Service on the Hughes Court

Roberts joined a Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes that was deeply divided along ideological lines. The Court's conservative bloc, known as the "Four Horsemen," consisted of Justices Willis Van Devanter, James Clark McReynolds, George Sutherland, and Pierce Butler. The liberal bloc, sometimes called the "Three Musketeers," included Justices Louis Brandeis, Harlan F. Stone, and Benjamin N. Cardozo. Roberts, along with Chief Justice Hughes, occupied the middle ground, and their votes often determined the outcome in closely contested cases.

This ideological positioning placed Roberts at the center of one of the most significant constitutional confrontations in American history: the legal challenge to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal programs. In the early and mid-1930s, Roberts frequently voted with the conservative bloc to strike down New Deal legislation. In cases such as United States v. Butler (1936), Roberts authored the majority opinion that invalidated the Agricultural Adjustment Act, finding that the federal government had exceeded its powers under the taxing and spending clause of the Constitution.

However, Roberts's jurisprudence during this period was not entirely consistent, and he occasionally sided with the liberal bloc. This unpredictability made him one of the most closely watched Justices of the era.

"The Switch in Time That Saved Nine"

The most consequential moment of Roberts's judicial career came in 1937 with the case of West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish. The case concerned the constitutionality of a Washington state minimum wage law for women. Just the previous year, in Morehead v. New York ex rel. Tipaldo (1936), Roberts had voted with the conservative majority to strike down a similar New York minimum wage statute. When Roberts voted in Parrish to uphold the Washington law, the shift was dramatic and historically significant.

Roberts's change of position, joined with the votes of the three liberal Justices and Chief Justice Hughes, produced a 5–4 majority that sustained the minimum wage law. This decision has been popularly referred to as "the switch in time that saved nine," a phrase that references its perceived connection to the defeat of Roosevelt's Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937. Roosevelt's bill, commonly known as the "court-packing plan," proposed to expand the number of Supreme Court Justices from nine to as many as fifteen, allowing the President to appoint additional Justices sympathetic to the New Deal. The conventional narrative holds that Roberts's shift in Parrish undermined the political rationale for the court-packing bill by demonstrating that the existing Court was no longer an insurmountable obstacle to New Deal legislation.

The actual motivations behind Roberts's vote in Parrish have been the subject of sustained scholarly debate. Some historians and legal scholars have argued that Roberts's vote was a calculated political maneuver designed to defuse the court-packing crisis. Others have contended that Roberts's position was consistent with his earlier jurisprudence and that his vote in Parrish was cast before the court-packing bill was publicly announced, suggesting that the political pressure from Roosevelt did not influence his decision. Roberts himself reportedly expressed frustration with the "switch in time" characterization, and his personal papers and the recollections of his colleagues have been cited on both sides of the debate.

Regardless of Roberts's personal motivations, the political significance of West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish was substantial. The court-packing bill was ultimately defeated in the Senate, and the Supreme Court went on to uphold subsequent New Deal programs, marking a lasting shift in the Court's approach to federal regulatory power.

Service on the Stone Court and Later Decisions

After Chief Justice Hughes retired in 1941, Harlan F. Stone was elevated to Chief Justice, and the Court entered a new phase. By this time, Roosevelt had appointed the majority of the Court's members, and Roberts found himself increasingly isolated as the sole remaining Justice not appointed by Roosevelt. His relations with his colleagues on the Stone Court became strained, and his position on the bench grew more difficult.

Roberts's dissent in Korematsu v. United States (1944) stands as one of the notable opinions of his later career. The case challenged the constitutionality of Executive Order 9066, which authorized the forced relocation and internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. The majority upheld the government's actions, but Roberts, along with Justices Robert H. Jackson and Frank Murphy, dissented. Roberts's dissenting opinion characterized the internment as a clear violation of constitutional rights, arguing that the case amounted to a conviction of citizens based solely on their ancestry.

Roberts was also the lone dissenter in Smith v. Allwright (1944), which struck down the white primary system in Texas as a violation of the Fifteenth Amendment. While the majority's ruling expanded voting rights for African Americans and is generally viewed favorably by historians, Roberts's dissent was grounded in his concern about the precedent of overruling recent decisions, particularly the Court's prior ruling in Grovey v. Townsend (1935), which had been decided only nine years earlier.

Roberts retired from the Supreme Court on July 31, 1945. He was succeeded by Harold H. Burton, who was nominated by President Harry S. Truman.

The Roberts Commissions

Outside of his regular judicial duties, Roberts served as the chairman of two important presidential commissions. The first, established in December 1941 shortly after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, was tasked with investigating the circumstances of the attack. Known as the Roberts Commission, it produced a report in January 1942 that assigned blame to the military commanders at Pearl Harbor, Admiral Husband E. Kimmel and General Walter Short, for failing to take adequate defensive measures. The Commission's findings were influential in shaping the initial public understanding of the attack, though its conclusions were later revisited and debated by subsequent investigations.

The second Roberts Commission, formally known as the American Commission for the Protection and Salvage of Artistic and Historic Monuments in War Areas, was established in 1943. This commission was responsible for coordinating efforts to protect cultural property in Europe during the Allied advance through Nazi-occupied territory. The commission's work supported the activities of the Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives program, whose officers became known as the "Monuments Men." The commission played an important role in identifying sites and works of cultural significance that required protection from combat damage and looting.

Dean of the University of Pennsylvania Law School

After his retirement from the Supreme Court, Roberts returned to his alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where he served as the eleventh Dean from September 1, 1948, to 1951. In this capacity, Roberts oversaw the law school during the postwar period, a time of significant enrollment growth as returning veterans pursued legal education under the G.I. Bill. He succeeded Earl G. Harrison as dean.

Personal Life

Roberts maintained his connection to Pennsylvania throughout his life. He resided in Chester County, Pennsylvania, where he owned a farm. He had one child. Roberts was a member of the Republican Party, though his judicial career was defined more by the complexity of his constitutional positions than by partisan affiliation.

Owen Josephus Roberts died on May 17, 1955, at his home in West Vincent Township, Chester County, Pennsylvania, at the age of 80. A Pennsylvania historical marker commemorates his life and contributions.

Recognition

Roberts's service on the Supreme Court and his leadership of the two presidential commissions brought him significant recognition during and after his lifetime. His role in the Teapot Dome prosecution and his pivotal vote in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish ensured that his name would remain prominent in discussions of twentieth-century American constitutional law.

The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission erected a historical marker in his honor, recognizing his contributions to American jurisprudence and public service.

Roberts's work on the second Roberts Commission, which focused on the protection of cultural property during World War II, has received renewed attention in the twenty-first century through the efforts of the Monuments Men Foundation for the Preservation of Art, which has documented the Commission's contributions to the preservation of European cultural heritage.

The Owen J. Roberts School District in Chester County, Pennsylvania, is named in his honor, reflecting his long association with the region.

Legacy

Owen Roberts's legacy in American law is defined by the tension between his role as a swing vote during the New Deal era and the broader arc of his judicial philosophy. His vote in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish remains one of the most discussed and debated moments in Supreme Court history. The phrase "the switch in time that saved nine" has entered the popular lexicon as shorthand for a dramatic judicial reversal with major political implications, even though the characterization of Roberts's decision as a politically motivated switch remains contested among scholars.

Roberts's dissent in Korematsu v. United States has gained significance over time. The majority opinion in Korematsu, which upheld the internment of Japanese Americans, was formally repudiated by the Supreme Court in Trump v. Hawaii (2018), in which Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that Korematsu "was gravely wrong the day it was decided." Roberts's dissent, which rejected the constitutionality of the internment program, anticipated the modern consensus that the decision was a serious constitutional error.

His leadership of the Roberts Commission on the protection of cultural monuments established an important precedent for international efforts to safeguard cultural heritage during armed conflict. The work of the Monuments Men, supported by Roberts's commission, contributed to the development of international legal frameworks for the protection of cultural property, including the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.

Roberts's career illustrates the challenges faced by justices who occupy the ideological center of a deeply divided court. His fifteen years on the bench encompassed some of the most consequential constitutional disputes in American history, and his decisions continue to inform scholarly and public discourse about the role of the judiciary in a democratic society.