The discussion begins with biographical profiles of Brennan and Marshall and examines how two men from divergent legal backgrounds came to share an unchanging stance against the death penalty. The analysis next considers the historical, theoretical, and jurisprudential legitimacy of Supreme Court dissents in general and sustained dissents in particular. The text also uses Thurgood Marshall's private papers concerning the decisionmaking process of the Supreme Court, including internal memoranda circulated among justices and draft arguments by the court, to provide commentary on the dissents of Brennan and Marshall in capital cases. The author also explains why the justices' sustained dissents against capital punishment are distinctive and questions the strategic wisdom and tactical usefulness of seeking a change in law through judicial decisions. Index and chapter reference notes