Seohye Kwon*<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Most people would remember Irving Robert Kaufman for his infamous judgment of the Rosenbergs’ case. In 1951, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted of violating the 1917 Espionage Act for transmitting national security information about the atomic bomb to USSR. Martin J. Siegel notes that Kaufman\u2019s death sentences for the American couple were broadly popular at first during the height of the Cold War and in the face of campaigns for clemency. However, later generations have not shared the same opinion, as \u201cthe Korean War ended, Stalin died, McCarthyism flamed out, and\u2026 miraculously, the Soviet Union itself disappeared.\u201d[1]<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n While these facts are relatively familiar, the wider record of Judge Kaufman\u2019s life and rulings is little known. The same judge extended the frontiers of liberalism through his rulings for desegregation, immigration rights, the distribution of wealth, and the pacifists against the Vietnam War. Siegel\u2019s Judgment and Mercy<\/em> provides a powerful lens for probing the apparent contradiction between Kaufman\u2019s harsh judgment<\/em> for the Rosenbergs and his mercy<\/em> for social minorities. Siegel\u2019s biographical examination of Kaufman and meticulous records of the cases the federal appellate judge took on are part of the author\u2019s effort to resolve the riddle about the \u201cjudicial schizophrenia\u201d[2]<\/a> of Kaufman.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Siegel\u2019s rich account of Kaufman\u2019s Jewish immigrant family background provides a crucial clue to this question. His parents fled poverty and antisemitism in Galicia, landing in New York, where he was born with the name Isidore in 1910. Changing his name to Irving, he sought to rocket from the poor Lower East Side, where he grew up, to a self-made \u201cAmerican\u201d man.[3]<\/a> Starting as a student at Fordham Law School, Kaufman eventually achieved a successful career, reaching the position of Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and crafting an \u201cimpressive version of the classic American dream.\u201d[4]<\/a> Kaufman said, \u201cThis can only happen in America.\u201d[5]<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Siegel takes the position that Kaufman\u2019s special faith in the country rooted in his personal experience took the form of a powerful belief in government. His pro-government bent led him to stand on the side of prosecutors in the Rosenbergs’ case, prejudging the defendants\u2019 guilt and intervening in the trial in ways that almost always helped the prosecution.[6]<\/a> Furthermore, Siegel contends that Kaufman found the Rosenbergs\u2019 support for communism a threat to his<\/em> America. Kaufman and the Rosenbergs had all been poor Jews on the Lower East Side. Whereas Kaufman realized his ultimate ambition to have a seat on the bench and glorified America, the Rosenbergs viewed Kaufman\u2019s path as a mirage: \u201cThe American dream they saw was a put-on invented by those at the top to mask widespread class exploitation, violence against racial minorities, and imperialism abroad.\u201d[7]<\/a> Kaufman understood the couple\u2019s turn toward a different dream as negating his own dream.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n This faith in the American dream manifested in a different form during his later career. His equation of the country with the government faded as the era was drifting away from the welfare state into political liberalism, a shift that brought campaigns for particularized individual rights through the 1960s and 1970s.[8]<\/a> In this new political environment, Kaufman sought to help America through his contribution to the reformation of legislation, cultivating a foundation for every<\/em> individual to thrive in the country.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n For example, according to Siegel, in John Lennon\u2019s trial for U.S. deportation apparently due to his U.K. conviction in 1968 for possession of drugs, but, in fact, because of the Nixon government\u2019s enmity toward his anti-Vietnam War protests and peace campaigning, Kaufman said as follows: \u201cIf, in our two hundred years of independence, we have in some measure realized our ideals, it is in large part because we have always found a place for those committed to the spirit of liberty and willing to help implement it. Lennon\u2019s four-year battle to remain in our country is testimony to his faith in this American dream.\u201d[9]<\/a> In this sense, what seemed fundamentally important for Kaufman was less a pro- or anti-governmental stance than the realization of justice<\/em> that he believed could be actualized in the form of the American dream.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Despite Kaufman\u2019s noble motives, it seems evident that his sentences for the Rosenbergs were overly harsh and rooted in his simplified and naive understanding of the government. However, Siegel seems to urge readers not to repeat the same kind of mistake by simplifying their views of Kaufman or his work based on the Rosenbergs’ case through the book\u2019s ample descriptions of the judge\u2019s career and life. That said, Judgment and Mercy<\/em> is not only about Kaufman\u2019s judgment and mercy for America but also about the reader\u2019s judgment and mercy for Kaufman.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/a>*Seohye Kwon is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of English at Louisiana State University.<\/p>\n [N.B. Ms. Kwon received a copy of\u00a0Judgment and Mercy<\/em> from the publisher, Cornell University Press, in exchange for her honest review. –Ed.]<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/a>*Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of English at Louisiana State University<\/p>\n [1] Martin J. Siegel, Judgment and Mercy<\/em> (Cornell University Press, 2023), at 114.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Id<\/em>. at 3.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Id<\/em>. at 17.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Id<\/em>. at 343.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Id<\/em>. at 124.<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> Id<\/em>. at 101.<\/p>\n [7]<\/a> Id<\/em>. at 124.<\/p>\n![\"Judgment](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/cornellpress-us.imgix.net\/covers\/9781501768521.jpg?ssl=1\")
<\/p>\n