Free The Brethren by Bob Woodward, Scott Armstrong

order was given?"
    Leonard continued, but he was interrupted repeatedly.
    Burger's low baritone attempted to soothe the waters. "Just one question if I may. If there had been no appeal here . . . can you assure us that the plans would have been submitted on December i?"
    Leonard was happy with that question. Yes, he assured the Chief. If the Court did nothing, the new plans would be submitted by then.
    Burger was satisfied. It was already the end of October. Whether the Court overturned or upheld the lower court order, the plans would be submitted in about five weeks. But White and Black forced Leonard to concede that even if the plans were in by then, the latest appeals court decision did not guarantee that desegregation would take place before the next school year. Leonard admitted that another year might go by without much progress.
    "Too many plans and not enough action," Black said with a thin smile, and the audience once again burst into laughter.
    The next day, Friday, October 24, the Justices met in conference to discuss the case. Tradition dictated that the Chief speak first, that he outline the issues and briefly state his view. Then the discussion would proceed in order of seniority, starting with Black. Theoretically, voting would then take place in the opposite order, starting with the junior Justice, Thurgood Marshall. But over a period of time, the formal vote had been dispensed with, since, in expressing his views, each Justice let it be known where he stood. If his position was firm, it amounted to a vote.
    The Chief, sitting in his chair at the end of the table, turned to the Mississippi case, the first major case of the term. The crowded courtroom the day before, the intense press interest, the passion of the lawyers and the obvious concern and emotion of his colleagues, suggested this case would be a landmark, an enduring guide for future cases of the same type. It might be the most important case since the original Brown decision. The Warren Court had built much of its reputation on fifteen years of school desegregation cases. Now, Warren Burger, as Chief Justice, would guide the Court to its next milestone. It would be a test of his leadership. From what he had heard and seen, Burger realized that unanimity, the unwritten rule in these cases, was going to be difficult to achieve. His own position differed from Black's September 5 opinion. Burger didn't think the Justice Department was being wholly unreasonable. Clearly there were practical problems—problems H.E.W. and the appeals court understood better than the Supreme Court—and it was important that the plans be workable. If revised plans were submitted December I, five weeks from now, it would not be a disaster for school desegregation. Yet Burger opposed delay for its own sake, and that was clearly what the district court in Mississippi favored. The Supreme Court should take a strong stand against that sort of stalling. It should issue a statement that there would be no delay and ask the appeals court to move as quickly as possible without prolonged debate. Perhaps the Justices could quickly issue a short, simple order opposing delay, and follow it with an opinion laying out their reasoning.
    Black, sitting as senior Justice at the opposite end of the conference table, spoke next. Five weeks, he said, was not the issue. It was symbolic. Any willingness on the part of the Court to grant a delay, no matter how slight, would be perceived as a signal. All those district court judges with hundreds of similar cases in their courts, all those Southern politicans, and the Nixon administration itself, were waiting for the Court to show any sign of weakening in its resolve. To appear to waver, even for a second, would be a betrayal. Bla ck attacked Nixon and his admini stration bitterly. They were allowing the South hope of further evasions. The Court must resolve the problem and reaffirm its commitment before Nixon took hold of the situation. What little