Talk:Robert H. Jackson

Rehnquist Memo
I do not really see why the Jackson article should contain an at length discussion about the Rehnquist memo. The controversy was about Rehnquist and his attempts at attribution, not about Jackson. This is all discussed in the Rehnquist article.

Yes, the memo was written for Jackson; but then so were hundreds of other memos. The Rehnquist article rightly contains a paragraph long discussion on the memo. While a mention of the controversy and a link to the Rehnquist article might be appropriate, a lengthy discussion (longer than the far more relevant Black-Jackson feud, as it stands now) seems out of place to me. Magidin 17:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that the Rehnquist article should discuss it in much greater detail; if you feel you can trim it down appropriately, go ahead, as long as you don't remove it entirely. Postdlf 17:23, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Family
Did this man have a family? Parents, wife, children or something? To me it seems like he came from space without any human relationsips. This whole article is jst about his work. Family facts are sadly not included. 89.51.158.22 09:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Most recent addition on feud with Black
The most recent addtiion (June 14 2007) is out of place in the sequence of the article. The cables to Truman are mentioned later on, in their proper chronological place. It should be moved to its proper place, and repeated matters should be removed (e.g., the contents of the cable). In addition, it seems to contain a fair amount of POV comments. Magidin 04:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Nuremberg section
Jackson's confrontation with the surviving Nazileaders during the international tribunal is curiously absent from this section. The link to the site honoring Jackson is perhaps understandably quiet on the matter, as Hermann Goering seems to have won more points against Jackson than he lost, though of course Goering's debating skill had no effect on the verdict. As written, the Nuremberg section places more emphasis upon Jackson's concern with the vacancy for chief justice back in DC.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge of the subject could expand the section, though not necessarily in the detail shown in the Goering entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.223.172.199 (talk)

Jackson vs. Black dispute
This article has been greatly revised since the last time I read it. It is no longer presented in a clear, chronological fashion. Furthermore, it appears to be biased against Justice Black. With the numerous citations and use of ibid, it almost seems like the individual whom revised the article was copying and pasting portions of a research paper. This article needs extensive clean-up to maintain a more neutral standing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

I have begun with some tentative reorganization. This was done by deleting most of the research paper that was dumped in here (although the part on Dennis, though it needs to be reworked, may prove useful). We now have only one section each on the feud with Black, and on the Nuremberg trials. --Max power 17:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I find the section "Feud with Black" to be gossipy and overly sympathetic to Jackson's point of view. It diminishes the article. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 23:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Refs
References that say things like "Id. at 230." must be changed to be intelligible even if the order of the references is moved around. This is very poor style in a frequently edited encyclopedia, and is officially deprecated. Would someone that actually knows for certain which ref these sources belong to please correct them? See WP:Citing sources for options. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Bot-created subpage
A temporary subpage at User:Polbot/fjc/Robert Houghwout Jackson was automatically created by a perl script, based on this article at the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges. The subpage should either be merged into this article, or moved and disambiguated. Polbot (talk) 01:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Circumstances of death
What where the circumstances of the death of Robert H. Jackoson? --41.144.55.198 (talk) 09:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

According to "disgraced historian" David Irving, he died in a Bordello bed, however his naked body was quickly moved into the back of a Taxi. "Disgraced historian" David Irving stated he confirmed the source via Jacksons son. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.87.97 (talk) 19:28, 21 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Irving's a nut case and not a Reliable Source. HammerFilmFan (talk) 11:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Robert H. Jackson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130626172414/http://www.gsa.gov/buffalocourthouse to http://www.gsa.gov/buffalocourthouse
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0062612/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Passed the bar?
The sentence "He passed the New York bar examination in 1913 at the age of twenty-one, and then joined a law practice in Jamestown." has a citation that only gives evidence for being on the bar in 1913 and for joining the law practice in Jamestown. There is no information about passing the bar exam. In the opening, it is stated that "He was admitted to the bar via the older tradition of reading law under an established lawyer". Thus, he did not need to pass the bar exam to join the bar. I have added citation needed tags to both of these statements, because they may be contradictory with each other, and neither is cited. 107.196.29.81 (talk) 13:47, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

After a bit of reading it has been clarified that reading the law counts as passing the bar. Now I understand. 107.196.29.81 (talk) 14:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)