In the 47 years I've been licensed to practice law, I have been fortunate to have gotten to know some really fine historians of law and related topics. One of those was the late Maxwell Bloomfield, professor at Catholic University School of Law.
In 1981 he gave me a reprint of his splendid article "The Supreme Court in American Popular Culture," 4 Journal of American Culture 1 (1981).
At the end he writes:
"Some may argue that much of this publicity [about the institution of the SCOTUS and its personnel] is counterproductive and only lowers the Court in public esteem. But on that point the views of the Justices themselves are instructive. Although many have discussed the question over the years, no one has better expressed the prevailing opinion than ASSOCIATE JUSTICE DAVID J. BREWER, WHO OBSERVED BACK IN 1898:
'It is a mistake to suppose that the Supreme Court is either honored or helped by being spoken of as beyond criticism. On the contrary, the life and character of its justices should be the object of constant watchfulness by all, and its judgments subject to the freest criticism. The time is past in the history of the world when any living man or body of men can be set on a pedestal and decorated with a halo. True, many criticisms may be, like their authors, devoid of good taste, BUT BETTER ALL SORTS OF CRITICISM THAN NO CRITICISM AT ALL.'"(emphasis added)
