‘The Brennan Grip:’ An Invigorating Touch : Court: Justice Brennan’s compassion for the individual in jurisprudence is not abstract--it extends to everyone around him.

As he sat quietly behind the bench in the majestic courtroom of the U.S. Supreme Court, Associate Justice William J. Brennan Jr. seemed dwarfed by the surroundings, by the physically larger justices adjacent to him, even by his own robes. From a distance, his figure, in recent years, appeared diminished further by the frailty of age.

But even the most casual encounter with him outside the courtroom puts that image immediately to rest. A surprisingly vigorous, deep and hearty voice emanates from this diminutive, old man. Everyone he meets--colleague, employee, old friend, new acquaintance--experiences the Brennan Grip, a remarkably powerful grasp of the arm that draws a visitor’s entire body to him. And, whether addressing the exalted issues of constitutional law or inquiring about the visitor’s family, he speaks with the vigor, energy and enthusiasm of a young man.

Brennan’s personal encounters reflect an abiding affection and concern for people that may be his birthright as the son of an Irish politician. To him, there is simply nothing more crucial--in personal relations or in the law--than recognizing the dignity and importance of every individual human being. Throughout his long career, he has deployed his considerable legal skills and his extraordinary personal charm to the advancement of a legal regime built on that premise.

Although his critics accuse him of “legislating” from the bench and imposing his personal policy views on society, Brennan’s overriding goal has, in fact, been to perfect our democracy, to make ours a nation in which everyone--regardless of their heritage, their views, or the limitations imposed by their personal resources--fully contributes and shares.

To Brennan, this is not merely a personal political ideal--it is a fundamental mandate of the U.S. Constitution. For he finds in that document not a series of 18th-Century rules frozen in time, but a living charter that commands us to aspire to a society enriched by the participation of every member. His commitment to attaining that constitutional mandate has given us a legacy of landmark decisions whose common theme is an insistence upon the conclusion and fair treatment of every citizen, even the most disadvantaged or despised.

In recent years, Bennan’s understanding of the Constitution has not always enjoyed majority support on the court. The days when he, Earl Warren and a carefully assembled and shifting coalition of strong-willed justices changed the entire fabric of U.S. constitutional law are in the distant past. Long before his retirement, he had grown accustomed to seeing a new conservative majority repudiate or limit many doctrines he had established in earlier years.

But even as he lost decision after decision, Brennan refused to take refuge in bitter, solitary jeremiads about the new conservatism. His faith in the court as an institution never flagged. Even when certain to lose, he would prepare tirelessly for the court’s conferences, carefully working out the precise arguments he would present to the other justices in an effort to persuade them of his views.

Surprisingly often, he would return from the conferences and excitedly inform his clerks that enough justices had agreed with him about a case that he would be writing a significant decision for the court. More often, his views had not prevailed, and he would recount the numerous cases in which he would have to dissent. Sometimes, a shadow would briefly cross his face. A rule he had long ago established had been rejected; a cherished Warren-era precedent had been overruled; or, most discouragingly, a sentence of death had been affirmed.

The moments of gloom never lasted long, however. Soon, Brennan would cheerfully return to work and inspire his clerks to do the same. The next morning, he would be at his desk no later than 7, personally reviewing the thousands of petitions for relief filed with the court. To the very end of his tenure, he was as dedicated to the process and as thrilled to be a part of it as he must have been when he first arrived.

Last month, near the end of what would turn out to be Brennan’s last term on the court, my family visited him in chambers one morning for the kind of friendly reunion session that had been played out countless times over the years by his more than 100 law clerks. The day’s court session was to start shortly, but, ignoring the commotion around him as the clerks and staff busily prepared, the justice warmly received us with his characteristically strong embrace. He spent nearly an hour attentively inquiring about our work, our families and our friends--as though those things were more important than anything else he had to do that day.

When it was time for him to set out for the robing room and we started to leave, he gripped my arm, winked and whispered, “Stick around; stick around and watch!” This was the signal that we should go to the courtroom, because he would be announcing an opinion for the court. He revealed this imminent pleasure with the eager anticipation of a child.

In the courtroom, after a number of other decisions had been announced by more junior justices, the chief justice turned to Brennan. The tiny, frail figure behind the monumental bench cleared his throat and, in a voice as strong and vigorous as ever, he announced the court’s opinion. He had, once again, managed to put together a surprising coalition of justices to support his view.

As he explained the decision, his pride, his enthusiasm and his belief in the value and importance of the work to which he has dedicated his life were unmistakable. Watching him, one would never guess that, for nearly 34 years, he had done this same thing more than 450 times.

In the years to come, those decisions, as well as the hundreds of opinions he wrote setting forth views that did not command a majority, will be sustained and repudiated, honored and vilified. Whatever their ultimate fate as the law of the land, however, they will endure collectively as perhaps the fullest and most powerful expression of a compelling vision of the constitutional order that places greatest weight on the dignity and importance of every individual in our democracy.

As for the man, he will watch with pleasure and satisfaction as future courts subject his opinions to the “uninhibited, robust and wide-open” debate that he deems essential to democracy and to the law. As he watches, he will be entitled to feel that, regardless of its outcome, the debate itself is an exhilarating vindication of his faith in people and in the process of democracy.

Stick around and watch, Justice Brennan.