Cspan. Org or listen on the go with the free cspan radio app. Announcer in june the Supreme Court ruled lgbtq individuals are protected from federal law from employment his termination. Justice Stephen Breyer talks about the decision, how the coronavirus has impacted the courts work, and broadcasting live audio of oral arguments. Moderator welcome, Justice Breyer. Welcome one and all. We are excited to be hosting Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer. Talia, if you can hear me, turn on your audio and video. I think your audio is on. Weve asked you to start your video and hopefully you can do that. It is a pleasure to welcome everybody back to Harvard Hillel. We have Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer. Justice breyer is on the United States Supreme Court and one of ascendedpeople to have in our nation. Jews have done18 so before. For our purposes, he was a professor at Harvard Law School and at the Harvard Kennedy school of government. Chief judge of the unites states court of appeals for the first circuit. Justice breyer, it has been a delight to speak with you over the past few weeks. You have been very kind, generous, so i thank you. Kid i was asked to memorize, as an assignment, the nine justices and yours was the easiest to remember because my home was filled with breyers ice cream. In my mind you were just as i cream. A friend came to visit me last year and he started calling me rabbi ice cream. Maybe after this we can gets my screen. Relationreyer no unfortunately. Moderator talia is my very good friend and is currently endures lung. She earned a degree from oxford and completed her doctorate at Harvard Law School and is finishing up a phd in business economics of the department of economics at harvard and Harvard Business school. Phd she was clerking and will be joining the faculty of Columbia Law School as an associate professor this coming july. It was hard for us to find a tv that could match yours. Impressive ing so your scholarship i have gotten to know you over the past few years. You and your husband are some of my dearest friends. Modest andredibly really down to earth. It is been a pleasure to get to know you. I will say my job, one of the highlights of my job, deals with our students. That means it is hard for me to accept invitations from friends. Invitation an open every time. Your salmonlice of or lasagna and there is always ice cream in the freezer. Just a reminder to everyone joining us we had around 1500 people who registered for the event so we will not be able to get to all questions, but at the bottom of your screen you will ae a queuing day box q box. You can do so anonymously. We will only have the opportunity to select a handful and when we do so my colleague and i will promote you to a panelist and you will be able to ask your question face to face Justice Breyer. For now, im going to turn it over to talia to begin our interview. Talia thank you for the introduction and i hope to attend and in person shabbat. Thank you, Justice Breyer, to take the time for us today. I thought i would start off by asking what does life look for you at the moment . Justice breyer thank you for taking the time. It must be about 12 30 at night for you and thank you for inviting me to the hillel. What does it look like . I told my son it is reading and writing. What i do is i read. I read a lot of briefs. They are not briefs, but nonetheless, i listen to oral arguments and i write opinions or join other peoples opinions. You have tob be on your toes. You have to be doing your best. You have to put out your best all the time. As i get older i think that is more and more of a shoe. Virtue. I do my job. Course, there are new members. Last year byron white said with every new member there is a new court. People have their own basic philosophies. Talia let me ask about how the pandemic has changed the way sessions are run by the Supreme Court. They are often rapidfire interrogation style. Sessions being conducted over the phone there seems to be an orderly way in which justices. Asked questions how do you think this is changed the dynamic of the Supreme Court . Justice breyer there is a minus na . A plus. You can get the lawyer to forget the other client. Bankruptcy orthe trademark or whatever. Conversation that advances the ball. There is less chance of that happening unless chance of communicating your views to others because there is less dialogue. The plus is it is more polite. Everyone gets a chance and you have to think about the questions and listen carefully to the answers. That is a big plus. I am not saying we did before, but that has improved. Balance in guess the best would go back to the old system, but reform. Understanding how important it is listen to your colleagues. Think, after this experience, may be when you go back to in person do you expect it to change or everyone enjoys the dynamics of the previous system . Justice breyer i think it will be changed and probably for the better. I think one question that will come up is that we are now broadcasting the sessions to the country if they would like to listen. We might or might not continue to do that. I dont know. We will have to discuss that and see how people feel. Our private sessions, each week we discuss the cases we heard that week, and those we do over the telephone. They are not broadcast. They should not be. It is exciting to talk like this given the landmark ruling of the Supreme Court that gay and transgender workers are perfected from workplace protected from Workplace Discrimination under the Civil Rights Act. I was wondering if you could say a few words about the case and its significance. Justice breyer the Civil Rights Act is title vii and says you cannot discriminate, in jobs, on the basis of race, national origin, sex, and other things. The question was, did discrimination against a gay man or gay woman or transgender person, did that discrimination was that on account of sex . But sixisagree about it people came to the conclusion that if you look at that word, personnd you see this who is gay was dismissed, and a man let us say, for a woman who was also attracted to a man would not be dismissed. That is with the majority held. Talia i imagine a case like the day the ruling is made public it was no surprise to me what the ruling was. It is so highprofile the Supreme Court is doing. How did that feel on your side . Justice breyer i have known about the case and i am pleased when i am on the majority side. I am pleased when other people agree with me and perhaps when i agree with them. There are articles in the newspaper and then it is onto the next case because what we are going to do is we are going to do our job. That is how it works. What was interesting in particular is that some of the papers went through public opinion. Public opinion is something that shouldnt, and normally does not, have much influence. Preferredthat 92 different results or 47 , but the point of independent judges who are not responsible from elections to the people if you were the least popular person in the United States, you are entitled to the same rights as the most popular person. If you are the least popular person on trial or any case, you should not popularity should not enter into it. If the public through the press or some other way has a view relevant to the law it will be, in all likelihood, be expressed. Nothing popularity, but the view that motivates it and why. Did the polls surprise you . Decision, affect your but compared to other cases there was overwhelming public support for the decision. That is fine. matteropinion could not because it is a different legal issue than the way it is presented to the public. Sense public support for the court is important. You go all the way back to cicero to discover that. He says a leader cannot lead through force. A leader has to convince people, who ever he is, he has to convince the public he should be followed. I do not know if that is true of all leaders, but i know it is true of courts. The time of segregation. Thise probably explained the woman who is the chief justice of ghana was trying to get justice promoted and said, why do people do what you say . I gave her a few examples. Brown v. Board of education, for a long time nobody did and that problem has not gone completely away by any means. Despite a desire in the south and many places to just ignore the court they went along. Why . It took Martin Luther king, it took a lotsboys, it judges towho are not understand the rule of law is important. Risk ofen i feel the not obey or not following the court has gone way down. People will follow with the court says out of habit or because they understand the rule of law and that is what i told her. I said the people you have to convince that the rule of law is important are not the judges. They already think so. The people you have to convince to follow a decision they may lawyers, with our not they already agree, they understand it, but contrary to 24 millionlief 3 inhabitants are not lawyers. Those are the people you have to convince. Go to your villages, go to the towns, explained to ordinary to ordinaryplain people they should accept a decision. It might be very unpopular. It might be wrong. If it is 54, somebody is wrong. It is better to accept it than not have a rule of law and when they understand that you will have a rule of law. By the way if you want to know something i found interesting, i was telling a group of stanford on one vote i was dissenting. Even though it was wrong, and even though it was important and made a difference, people did not throw rocks, they did not go the streets and have riots, they did not start shooting each other, they accepted the rule of law. Said i know about 20 or 30 w are thinking of you are thinking this is wrong. I replied to my conversation i am having with these people before you come to a final conclusion turn on your Television Set and see how people decide matters of importance, legal matters, others, in countries that do not have rule of law. See what you would prefer. Not all countries have a legal system in which justices publicly disagree with one opinions. Dissent think thetent do you legitimacy of the Supreme Court in the u. S. And respect for rule of law is related to that kind of public disagreement that is so frequent in the system of the Supreme Court . Justice breyer people have different opinions about that. Where there are no dissenting opinions, many people think that is a better way to have rule of law because the public will think all of the judges are telling us to do this. That is what they will see. All of them are telling us this is the rule. My personal view, and i think many in this country and other places would accept the opposite view. I think most people will believe not everybody agrees on many cases. About 40 of the time we are letimous, but nonetheless us be upfront about it. Truth whichthem the is we are not agreeing always. I promise you, on most of these cases that are the most controversially politically or socially or generally, there are good arguments on both sides. If people take the time to read it, they will understand it. I think that will help the court. I cannot guarantee it, but i think it will help the rule of law in this country. Decisionsbring up the that were disputed recently, the pandemic has raised many complicated legal questions. Came beforeat the court and relevant at Harvard Hillel is limiting the events. Ce at religious talk about the delicate balance between Public Health and other considerations. How should we think about the role of the judiciary . Justice breyer i thought we out i thought we ought to stay out of it. We have no idea how covid spreads and the people who are more likely to know, even if they do not have perfect knowledge on the governors and other parts of the government, they are likely to know more about the science that we are. There is a tendency to stay out of it and we could in that instance legally stay out of it. I was with the majority that kept us out of it. I related because the places of worship are so central to that decision. You aboutcould ask how your jewish background has played a role in how you approach being a judge and the notion of justice. Justice breyer justices are central to judaism. Pursue. Shall you i do not know which book that is. I think it is exodus. [laughter] throughout the torah and throughout the books that compose it in the history of the seesh people you considerable interest in placing of great importance by the ability of human beings to live in this world together, peacefully, harmoniously, and productively as a society. Of course other religions have the same idea, but i think judaism emphasizes that. That to me is what law is about. It is not just going out and saying whatever you think will be good. Absolutely not as you will know from your profession. It takes a lot of study and a lot of time. It takes a lot of learning and there is law here in law there in law all over the place and you to try and figure out how it fits together. If i were to say one general objective of the way americans see law and the way jews see law, is to help bring about that productive and harmonious society. We are far from it, but nonetheless we tried. The Supreme Court is of different religious backgrounds that also have a notion of justice embedded in that religion. Beforeknow and mentioned alsouestion of justice comments on many Legal Systems in the world. To me one of the things that interests me in your work im quoting an article from 2010 called it an adventurous in law. Ture why would you bring foreign law into this . Justice breyer i think you might learn, sometimes, through certain decisions and from certain circumstances, that take place abroad. Knowledge does not end at the shore. Relevant knowledge does not end at the shore and today we have we interact in dozens of different ways. More there will be, and there are situations that i can remember there is an ever increasing number of democracies, belief in human rights, of working things out together. Diseases, the economy, the environment, all things like that are beyond one country. Boy, have we seen it. I have been here with my grandchildren in the house for 10 weeks. Course, with problems like that either we help with other countries to find solutions or they will go their own way and we will be stuck with their solutions. There is not much choice in general and specifically if i find which i do more often find a Foreign Court or relative foreign legal people facing a problem like we have and in that country they have a document like our constitution and the judge has to make a i say read it. Read it and use it if it is relevant. It cannot hurt. Sometimes, more than you think, it might help. That is what i mean by following law beyond our own shores. I think part of your appreciation for learning is related to your academic background, but one of the things i am really interested in is when you look at both the fact that you were an academic before becoming a judge in moving from that to a judge, i am interested in that move what you see as the similarities and dissimilarities between being an academic professor of law and on the judiciary. Academics do get to know a field pretty thoroughly and they understand pretty thoroughly with the law is and they can make good recommendations. They are very helpful to judges and quite a lot of what we do is try and figure out, under the law, what is the better legal result . The big difference to me is you have to keep in mind that a court is an institution in the job of that institution is to decide. Therefore, you have to stop dithering. I am not saying all academics dither, but you decide the case. It may not be a perfect decision, but you go onto the next case. People whohave nine agree. That means you cannot get your own way all the time. You have to work out what is important enough to take a stand and what is not important enough. How do you create that group . How do you become a member of that group . That is a major feature of a court of nine people. Neednt exist in academic environment. Together, get a decision, decide it, and onto the next case. Talia would you say in that respect your experience in . Overnment is more useful Justice Breyer the most useful was when i worked for senator kennedy in congress. I have a mug with the sayings i would quote from him. Two of them at that i think are terrifically important one is if you have a choice between getting 30 of the you want or zero correct path is obvious. It is the first. Try to get 30 rather than nothing. That is absolutely true. The second thing he said which i think is terrifically important and helpful is credit is a weapon. People want credit for what they do. But do not do that. Designedthat credit is to help you get what you want. Who cares about the credit . Successful,tive is there will be plenty to go around. If it is a failure, who wants to credit . I cannot tell you how many times i saw him, the senator, go over to some republican who disagreed with them, sit down and say, look, we disagree, but let us talk about it. That person will Say Something eventually and you will say, maybe we can work with that. If you do work with that and success is achieved, you will say thank you. When the time comes to get the credit in the press is there how often i have seen him push the other person in front and say, so and so was so helpful to us, so helpful on this. The next cannot hard to do and i say anybody else always does it, but it is a valuable weapon when you are working with a group of people who might disagree. Talia i dont want us to think necessarily that type of experience from what you are describing, it sounds like what the stereotype people often have , athe court and of justices lot of tension, does not fit what you are describing in terms of the importance of that communication in building those coalitions. Get breyer we all that doesnt change. At the conference is where we are discussing cases, i have never i have said this many times i have not heard a voice raised in anger. I have not heard one judge Say Something mean about another, not even as a joke. It is professional, it is calm, it is polite, you go through what you think, you talk if there is room to achieve an agreement and listen to what the other person says, and then it is onto the next case. You can be friends with people with whom you disagree, a lot. Experience to be with nine people who have different views quite often in that doesnt affect how true that was when i worked in the legislature, or the executive. There we are your personal relations are a different thing. There we are. Personal relations are a different thing. Argued on the floor and people got upset, and a leader of the democratic side said in explanation later, you may not know this, he said to another senator, but last week, the senators wife had cancer, he called senator kennedy and senator kennedy arranged for terrific treatment. Business is business and personal relations are a different matter. Thats what i learned working in that senate. I think it is so important now. I think it is so important. Talia i will kind of and my part of the questions end my part of the questions and asking how you see these challenging times. We are not only in the middle of , but there is a conversation about racial. Ustice have anyering if you thoughts about how the current pasttion relates to the and how this might relate to the current conversation we are having on that political participation. I hope everyone of course we want this to succeed. Of course we want to build a multiracial society. Of course we want to be able to prove to the world that our society of many races, of many religions, of many points of view, of Many National origins can work because we can pull together. I believe in that. I think most americans do. When i was in fifth grade, our teacher assigned to us fifth graders, in groups of four, a task about writing about something about San Francisco and be regraded, but not individually. We regraded as a group. So you had to get along with the other three people. If you wanted a grade. That is what we are supposed to be good at. Understanding, other peoples points of view, a city level, a local level, we have seen that with covid, the neighborhood has sometimes risen to the occasion and they think about it and we Work Together to build something. And is a pollyanna attitude there are lots of obstacles, but we have overcome many, so we keep going. It is corny, but it is true qb George Washington and he wrote to a friend of his, this Great American democracy is an experiment, we dont know if it will work. Him him Lincoln Abraham , our grandchildren memorized the gettysburg address, why . , if anylincoln says nation can long endure, it is an experiment. That is what i like talking to the students at stanford or elsewhere, because i usually end by saying, you know, i cant tell you what kind of a life to lead, but i can tell you that this document i have it on my desktop as the constitution the people who wrote that knew that our experiment would succeed only if we understand it, if we have a rule of law, and if we Work Together. So i hope that comes out of the present focus of attention. Much forank you so thoughtful answers. Appreciateontinue to points of view, so thank you very much. Justice breyer thank you. Thank you so much for those questions. We have almost 1000 people on this call and many questions coming in so we will not be able to get to all of them. We will begin with marty. I will ask you to start for video and unmute yourself. Marty is an old teacher and mentor of mine, it is great to see you. Marty steve breyer and i were classmates at Harvard Law School and we were in the same study group until i realized i could not keep up with him and dropped out. Ask,uestion i wanted to help us understand the difference between truth and justice because i think they are often confused. Justice breyer very nice to see you. Why pleasure. Thank you. But, sure. We are notuch exactly looking for truth as justice as judges. We dont want falsehood, but the primary goal of the court is justice. How to bring that about, that is not so easy, because, as you know, it gets immersed in detail and you know when you see a result that you think is an unfair result but it is commanded by the law, you are upset and you try to work hard within legal techniques and so forth to avoid it and you are not always successful. Goals,re are different maybe it was moses, said justice, shall you pursue. Giving people their rights and so forth. It is a different task, but related. Thank you. Marty, it is good to see you. Sophomore. Over to a im going to ask you to turn door video it already is. Unmute yourself. All right, go ahead. Thank you so much for being here. It is a pleasure to hear from you. You previously spoke about the importance of the rule of law in the United States. Im curious to hear what you think about the stability of law and how it has been affected by President Trump selection President Trumps election and current events. Can you imagine a scenario in which you would face a tension between what you believe is the legal decision in fear of able mentation of that decision by the executive branch . Im an optimist, i think that is unlikely. But i dont know. What we do is our job. If i go back to the senate, it is because i learned a lot there. One of the things that i learned i dont know if you will like this answer or not one of the things i learned is that the elected members of congress tend to do what they believe their constituents want them to do. The more you think about that, the more you understand that in the United States, what i reform,is when you want you dont begin with the politicians, you begin with your friends and classmates and others who might disagree in the way you convince them or try to convince them is by talking to them and participating, so thats what i tell students. I say, whether you continue or not, work toward the goals of democracy and human rights and fairness, the way we do that is we do it and you do it slowly and we convince others and we dont just go and say, everything is terrible, i cant get anything done. Please dont do that. There andout participate and try to convince others, and you might not, they might convince you, but if you dont, you are not going to like this, but i did say it. If you are worried about the way things are going, if there is too Much Division and people are too harsh when they speak about each other, i will tell you the first place to look. He said, what . I said, look in the mirror. You see . You try, too. That is again, slightly corny. As you get older, what you say is more corny. I do, in fact, think that. So im an optimist, i think that is what will happen, that is within our traditions, and i innk we will succeed convincing people, participating , and that will help the country change and improve. Thank you so much for that question. We are going to go to our rising sophomore in chicago. Go ahead. Much for being here. I wanted to ask, what would you say is the most meaningful thing in your life right now . Wife, myreyer my grandchildren, my children, thats always going to be true. Are you married . Im not married, im a sophomore. Justice breyer well, you will see. Family is of overwhelming importance. Then you can organize other things. You better listen to the others around you, too. Thank you. Thank you for that question. To an going to go incoming student. Im going to ask you to turn on your video and you should be able to. Go ahead. Thank you so much for speaking with us today. My question is, it has been long believed that humans are imperfect and it is this imperfection that is essential to who we are. If every justice has a unique way of approaching the constitution, interpreting the constitution, and that approach endows them with predict ability when deciding some cases before the court, our justice is truly impartial and to what extent should justices be impartial . Justice breyer they should. An hour, pretty much. Nothing is perfect. Dont overstate the extent to which people disagree. Most of our cases are unanimous. 54 cases are typically 50 , 25 , not always the same five and four. I looked it up, there were 18 54 cases out of 70 and of those, six out of the 18 were the the press would call usual suspects, the liberals and conservatives. Of every one of those 12, if i didnt look it up, i think each time, the newspapers would have said, in an unusual combination. If 12 is an unusual combination and six brent all right, what about those six or what about the 12 . If people say, are they doing this because they have different politics . The answer is no. I did work in the executive and politics isand popular in which party you belong to. Politics. No, thats not something court. Not there, havent seen it. Ideology, are you a Free Enterprise or were are you a troublemaker or what . That translates into, im improving the world by following my ideology, i know thats wrong , and they try not to do that. Francisco,up in san i did go to the local high school, i have led the life i lead, so by the time you are in your 50s, does that give you certain views . Yes, it does. You will see. You will see whatever your profession, and when that graduate, theyou grow out of your experience, you cannot jump out of your own skin and you shouldnt. That is where you begin to get disagreements. Disagreements on emphasis. Everyone thinks that to decide a be thery meaning words, they are important. Look at the traditions. Look at the history. Look at the president. Look at the values and purpose that underlie a particular phrase and look at the consequences related to the purpose. Everyone thinks that. But some put more weight on history, language, tradition, purpose, consequence, and some put more weight on purpose and consequence, we certainly put weight on the other four. It is a question of emphasis. Court, is first on the thought, i dont know why everyone doesnt agree with me all the time, im so reasonable. [laughter] it is awful that they disagree. Then, over time, i changed my view. It is a big country. There are 345 million people. They consist of every race, religion, national origin, point of view, and they learn to Work Together. That there terrible is a long tenure on this up in court and different president s appoint different people and those different people may have different emphases that show up in certain cases. That isnt such a bad thing in a country like ours where we are trying to live together. Not such a bad thing. And that describes my own feelings on what being on the sipping court is like. On the Supreme Court is like. We are going to go to a rising senior. You should be able to unmute yourself. Go ahead. Sharing you so much for your time and wisdom. Learn if yourto voice is not recognized historically, how do you recommend overcoming institutional prejudice and getting recognition in the law . Justice breyer thats pretty interesting. Are you thinking of racial things . Whether it is race or orientation areice breyer there differences of opinion on that. One suggested and got me and my friends to read three autobiographies written by Frederick Douglass. Slave and hef as a came to the north, where he found bots of prejudice still lots of prejudice still. He said of abraham lincoln, he is first and foremost a politician, he is not first and foremost lets free the slaves. That is a difference. How should these former slaves behave to overcome this prejudice . He says, get out there and do your job. Get a job. Then do it. Did our best. That will do it. Or it will help and others disagreed with that. I would read some of the people. Impeachers, to the where they impeached andrew johnson. Read what they say. Read what Frederick Douglas said. They often dont say the same thing. Then try to work it out for yourself. Thank you so much. To we going to go will begin with a rising junior. Go ahead, you should be able to unmute yourself and turn on your video. There you go. So nice to meet you. Isave my first question what was your proudest moment while on the Supreme Court . Good point. Er remember theard to pluses. The pluses are what you get to agree with you in the majority, and it is an important one. But the minuses, he did not get people to agree with you. A dissent im pleased with is the dissent i wrote in the affirmative action case. Can you have affirmative action . I thought you could. My lockers, we spent a lot of time on that might law clerks, we spent a lot of time on that. You become proud of the work that you do. That is what Oliver Wendell holmes said. He calls it workmanship. It is not necessarily because you made a big plus on an issue that the country needs this clause or whatever. It is more likely related to the time and effort in the work that you did, perhaps in the direction of being a writer, and that is why cases that may seem significant, like a copyright a copyrightuld get on a dress design, i put a lot of effort into that. It was fun, it was interesting. I did not convince many people, but i was proud of the result. Nothing answer you were expecting, but there we are. Thats what workmanship is about. Thank you. Thank you for the question. We are going to our second of three millers. I will ask you to unmute yourself and your video. Go ahead, ask your question. Thank you for taking the time to talk to us. I was wondering if you could answer a question about my mom and i were discussing before this call. If you could talk about a Supreme Court decision that had an effect on society which is often underestimated or underappreciated. Justice breyer the pub him is we dont know. The problem is we dont know. Things happen. You my decision and it is the later events that will tell you. You white a decision and it is the later events that will tell you. A decision and it is the later events that will tell you. We dont know. Obviously, the up washer decisions were important and had an effect. Weree abortion decisions important and had an effect. There have been they have all had an effect. You see an explanation every day of the stock market of why the stock market went up or down. Writing the article those factors before hand, he would be a multibillionaire. What happens, the thing happens. Then after work, people find an explanation. A lot of that is true of history. A lot is true of the decisions that the Supreme Court makes. If you are a lawyer and you have been to law school, you will at theout a case which, time, nobody heard of, and it was a case that said that state law governs state law and state Court Decisions decide state law and the Supreme Court cant say anything about it, that has an enormous impact. It was a technical case. Marshall knew that when hes when he wrote courtnion, the supreme will have the last word as to whether a particular statute is consistent with the constitution , they can decide that and they will decide that. He probably knew that was pretty important and it has turned out to be pretty important. But arent many like that. Thank you for your question thered we are going to go thank you for your question. We will go to an incoming student. Thank you for speaking without. Recenttion is about proposals to expand the Supreme Court and add more justices. I was curious what your opinion is, do you think it is a good idea . Justice breyer that is a very good question. Answer,m not going to but i will tell you why. The reason im not going to answer is i dont want to have something i say become a headline tomorrow. That would help no one and that is a question that if i i suggestview about what happened when Franklin Roosevelt had his plan to pack the court and that will inform you. May eventually be expressed or it may not but it is not going to be now. Im sorry. Thank you for the candor. I think the final question of the evening, a recent alumni. It is great to see you. Unmute yourself and go ahead. Thank you again for taking the time to talk to us. My question is, how do you think you have changed over your tenure on the court . Well, a person is appointed to the court in almost all of us when we are first appointed the truth is, we are sort of frightened. We are nervous. We may not show it. I thought i could do this job, but had window i really can echo how do i know i really cant . Yearses two or three before you become used to it. Eventually, you have seen in one form or another the kinds of questions that arise in our court. And you become more confident. Then after a certain amount of time, you end up thinking, i dont know if i can get these right or not, they are difficult questions. The most i can do is the best i can do. Do your best, and there you go. You become more satisfied with that then you would have been at the beginning. Thank you for that question thered when i started my job as chaplain at harvard, i thought i knew what i was doing a little bit, was also fighting. Sermonu gave a competing at the holiday service, so that instilled a little more fear in my own eyes. It is wonderful to have you back this evening. I have some special ice cream here that i will be eating for dessert this evening. Hopefully we will get some ice cream together. Thank you for being generous with your time. I know you offered to spend a little more time but i know your wife was to make sure you have dinner before you have another event this evening so thank you for joining us, it is a pleasure to see you. Hopefully we get to see you and person soon. I wish you and your family health. Thank you for joining us this evening. Everyone a wonderful evening, wonderful week. Stay healthy. We have more events coming up, we are scheduling them. You will receive email invitations to those in the future. Once again, good evening to all. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] followed a federal response to the coronavirus pandemic at cspan. Org coronavirus. Whats congress, white house briefings, and updates from governors, track to spread throughout the world with interactive maps, watch ondemand any time unfiltered at sea coronavirus at cspan. Org coronavirus. Dei going to talk about the july 4 at the white house with a historian, joining us via zoom. Event did notjuly take place at the white house until 1801, after the white house was built. What do know about the first Independence Day celebration at
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.