Transcripts For CSPAN3 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Supreme Court Tour And Interview 20240712

National gallery. I have five from the museum of american art, from a collection called the frost collection. All from the United States. In the period, roughly from the 1920s into the 1930s. Did you pick them yourself . Yes. Which one in here is your favorite . My favorite is called the infinity. Its the figure eight. These are both from the national gallery. Those are my number one favorites of the items of the museum of american art. I like cunninghams infinity. Talk about these photos over here. Tell us just about anyone that comes to mind. In this photo, justice kennedy, Justice Breyer and i are taking part in the Washington National operas production. We were extras. This is the ball seen. The prince welcomes guests of various kinds. We brought them the ambassador of russia, the ambassador of hungary, and then he greeted the three supremes, and we marched on to the stage and sat for the rest of that act and watched the show. What about the gavels . They were given to me by various people. They all have inscriptions and i dont know that any of those are particularly memorable. But there is a photograph there. That was taken in 1978. Justice marcia and i were judging a moot court at the university of california of berkeley law school. It is one of my fondest memories. He was still in very good health. When you work in an office like this, when atmosphere do you want . Does it matter to where you are when you do your writing and thinking, reading . I like to be in a quiet place. I like to have my law clerks close at hand. In my regular chambers, all of the law clerks were inside the chambers. Now i have two that are in that office and to down the hall. I like a quiet place and like to be overlooking the courtyard in front of the building. So i am not disturbed by demonstrators. What are these masks right here . These are from my first trip to china, which was in 1978 when china was barely set up for tourists. Someone gave me this set of masks while i was there. What about the photos . There is a whole series of them. Those are also from 1970. A trip to china. I was with the First American Bar Association and the legation to visit at the request of the government. I was most fortunate because i was the only women in the delegation. China was not well set up for tourists yet. I had a room of my own throughout the trip and these pillars of the barr of these distinguished gentleman, had to double up in my room. This is the same photograph that was on my book cart. Right next to that is a photograph of senator michael ski. Yes, it was taken also in 1993, when i was the new justice. It is my example of how relative most things are, so if you ask me, and my short . I would say yes, compared to chief justice rehnquist. But next to senator murkowski, im a giant. So this desk, is that your personal selection, and where did you get it . This desk is made here at the court. All of the chambers have similar desks. The variation in these chambers as they have put a granite top. On the desk as i have on the work table. What kind of books do you keep there on the shelf . Books that i can access most often. I have them in two places. What would be the book that you refer to the most . It would be a tossup between these two. This one is the seventh edition of the federal courts and federal system. The constitutional law casebook by sullivan. He produced the spot by himself until two editions ago. Kathleen sullivan joined him. Shes carrying on the work. Is this a book that all judges and justices would have in their office . They would certainly have some constitutional references. I dont know that they would own or choose the same one. This is one of the finest casebooks from law school. Angela gun there was my teacher in columbia. And my good friend thereafter. What do you remember most about him . Has brilliance and humanity. You have a president s corner. We start with jimmy carter who gave me my first good job in this capital city. There is a photograph that should be seen in association with this one. When jimmy carter became president , there was only one woman on the federal an entire country. Jimmy carter was determined to change the complexion of the u. S. Judiciary. There is a photograph that shows president carter in october of 1980 when he may have sensed that he would lose the election, but he held a reception for women he had appointed to the bench, and said that he hoped he would be remembered for changing the face of the u. S. Judiciary for appointing women and members of minority groups and numbers. He chose people of the very best quality. People who had not been looked at before. After he set that pattern, no president ever retreated from it until president reagan was determined to be the president who pointed the first woman to this court as he did, and he made a splendid choice in just a Sandra Day Oconnor. But it is jimmy carter who decided that the federal judiciary should draw on the talents of all the people of the great United States. What did you do in his administration . I was on the u. S. Court of appeals for the d. C. U. S. Courthouse. So before that, it had not had any government experience . Before that, i had been a law teacher for 17 years. A general counsel to the one of the things you talk about from time to time is the fact that you were, before the court, representing the aclu . I was representing a client that was a supporter of the aclu. Before we go back to some of the president s, what is the difference between standing in front of the courts and being on the other side . The difference is on the other side, you ask the questions. And being a council, you answer. From your own experience standing before the court, have you treated the attorneys any differently because you had that experience . I think i have a keen understanding of what its like to be at the receiving end of questions. I also know that as an attorney i welcomed questions from the bench. I know some lawyers regard questions as an interruption in an eloquent speech prepared to make. But another get wants to know what is on the judges mind. So she would welcome questions as a way of satisfying the judge without the counsels response. Can i ask you about this picture back here . That is my husband of 55 years. Martin david ginsburg. He was at the university of los angeles. Its a typical pose. He was reading a good book. One of the things you have not talked about is his cooking. He is the master chef in our house. I was phased out of the kitchen by my food loving children. That was 30 years ago. Does he ever cook for the court . Yes. Martin as much and demand at the quarterly lunches for the Supreme Court spouses. I maybe a little bit biased and prejudiced, but i think he may be by far the best. How do those quarterly lunches work . Are they just for the justices . Just for the justices spouses. The wives of justices. They also regularly invite the windows of justices. Kathy douglas stone. Andy stewart. Sissi marshall. The weight of Potter Stewart . Yes. Who else do you want to talk about . Clinton, w. Bush . His father . Congolese rice is swearing and as our secretary of state. She lived in the building where my husband and i lived. She is an accomplished musician. We were fortunate to attend one of her musical evenings. She called me and asked if i would administer the oath of office. I thought that was a great thing to do. It showed bipartisan spirit. We are all proud to be servants of the usa. It should not matter that i happen to have been appointed to the bench by jimmy carter and president clinton. Both democrats. I thought that that was a very nice gesture on her part. Who else on this table do you want to talk about . I want to talk about this one. This is my grand daughter, one of my three grand daughters. It was taken in the fall of 1992 when president clinton was running for office, and his wife Hillary Clinton happened that day to be visiting the Nursery School attended by my then three year old granddaughter. They are doing the toothbrush song together. This picture was featured in the new york post. When i saw it, i got a copy and sent it to my granddaughter who is now 18. I wrote on the bottom, may you always know where to stand. Who is this lady, right here . My mother. Perhaps the most intelligent person i ever knew. Sadly, she died when i was 17. I read that she died the day before you graduated high school. Right. What impact that have on you in those days . It was one of the most trying times in my life. But i knew that she wanted me to study hard. To get good grades and succeed and life. So that is what i did. Behind you some more pictures. I want to ask you about this one over here. This has been published before. Yes. That is a photograph of just a scalia and me. We are taking an elephant ride at a palace. It was the palace of the it was a very elegant elephant, as you can see. But we had a rather bumpy ride. Why dont we walk around your desk here. It is often reported that you and Justice Scalia are good friends. People dont understand how you can be so different in your thinking and still be friends. Can you tell us how that happens . I have known Justice Scalia since the days that he was a law professor. I was so taken by his with and his wonderful sense of humor. I heard a lecture that he gave. I disagreed with most of what he said, but i loved the way he said it. Justice scalia is a very good writer. He cares about how you say it. He is a very am using fellow. When he sat next to me on the d. C. Circuit bench, not this configuration, but when Justice Oconnor was with us, i was sitting next to Justice Scalia. He could Say Something that was so outrageous and so funny, that i had to pinch myself so i would not laugh out loud in the courtroom. Humor . Its that and because we both care about family, and about each others families. Back in here i know youve got your robes. Tell us how that works on court day. On a court day, the roads i kept in the living room, and we all had closets there. We would enter the rubbing room and the attending would help us put on our robe. In this closet i brought up the robe i most use often in court. This one, the robe was from england, and the caller was from cape town, south africa. You know the standard robe is made for a man, because it has a place for the shirt and tie to show. So Sandra Day Oconnor and i thought it would be appropriate if we included it as part of our rope. Something typical of a woman. I have many many collars. This is one of my favorites. I just like the style. This is not a judges robe. I saw this in the museum in cape town. What is the importance of the rogue for a judge . I think it is a symbol of we are all in the business of impartial judging. In the United States, the great chief Justice John Marshall said judges in the United States should not wear red robes or maroon robes. They should wear plain black. But every once in a while, not in this court, but at a court in law school, i would use this rogue. Let me take this. This one was a gift to me by the Supreme Peoples Court and china. When i was in china, i think it was 1995, i was a guest of their highest court. I visited several courts in major cities. When i was in beijing, i admired the robes the justices were wearing. By the time i got to shanghai, they had made up a robe for me and presented to me as a gift. This is my chinese robe. In canada, both the lawyers and judges war robes. This is a standard french but the women jurists in quebec thought that they should enhance their raba with a lovely least collar. Tell us about the traditions around the rioting robing room the first thing we do when entering the robing room, we go around the room shaking hands with each other. That is a symbol of the work that we do is a collegial body. You maybe temporarily because you received a spicy from a colleague. But when we go to sit on the bench we look at each other, shake hands, and its a way of saying we are all in this together. We care about this institution more than our individual egos. And we are devoted to keep in the Supreme Court in the place and it is as a coequal third branch of government, and i think a model part of the world in the collegial and independence of the judges. When you really have about some decision and something that somebody said what do you tell yourself . You think first there is another case ahead. What makes no sense as a great colleague on the d. C. Circuit, judge edward cam once told me, when i was a court of appeals judge, when you are working on an appellate bench, you are never making decisions alone. We were always having to work with colleagues. You do your best in every case. But, when it is over, it is over. And you dont look back. You just go on to the next case and give it your all. That is wonderful advice. Dont worry over what has happened. Just go on to the next case. You gave a speech in boston earlier in the year or you talked about the lighter side of the court, including the musical. Explain that. Justice Harry Blackmon who spent his summers and aston and enjoyed the Music Festival there decided that we should have an annual music cal, when the courts hearings are done, because in may and june we were writing opinions, but when we have no more court hearings, we should take time out for a musical interlude that all of us can enjoy. So he started that in 1988. Initially, it was over every two years and then it was once a year. Now we have musicals twice a year. When Justice Blackmon retired he passed the baton to Justice Oconnor. And for the last seven years, i have been attending to the music callous. Where do they happen in the court and how many people can come to them . The music cals take place and our beautiful Conference Room. Where our lovely steinway grand is and we can accommodate, i think, not more than 200 people. Itch justice can invite up to six people and then many people from the Supreme Court Historical Society attend, and leaders of the courts staff. A new justice comes to this court and they come to you and sit in your office and say, tell me what i should know about this court that will make it a better experience. What do you tell them . I would say, you will be surprised by the high level of collegiality here. This term, i think, we divided five to four in almost one third of all the cases. When i get a false impression on that degree of disagreement. Just once commented that in his early years on this court there was no justice with whom he disagreed more often than justice granted. And yet, Justice Scalia considered justice granted his best friend on the court at that time. And he thought the feeling was reciprocated the public wouldnt know that for meeting firm and dissent by scalia, or the other way around. But these were two men who genuinely liked each other, and enjoyed each others company. When youre up on the bench looking out at the court, what do you see that we dont see . Sitting in the court looking at you. I see a wonderful freezes, and magnificent proportions of that courtroom. And sometimes i say to myself, im a really there or is it all a dream . Its one of the most beautiful courtrooms i think in the world. In your lighter side speech you talk about the luncheons that you all have after in the corridor at a conference. Where are they held and whats the atmosphere . They are held in the justices dining room which is on the second floor it is a beautiful room very well furnished. But the food as i have said is not exactly good cuisine. It comes from the public cafeteria the justices eat the same things that any visitor to the court might choose for lunch here. Do you have to go to that lunch . Its not obligatory but we generally do and i try not to miss a post argument lunch because you never know what my colleagues will be talking about. They may be talking about the case that we just heard. And i wouldnt want to be absent when that discussion. So i can make my comments about it and listen to my colleagues. So i will understand whats in their mind. Is there any symbolism and the paintings of the room of marbury and madison . Marbury and madison is is probably the most famous case this court ever decided. It reminds us that we have a responsibility given to not give into most judges in the world that is what we call judicial review for constitutionality. We interpret statutes most of the time. But sometimes the question arises under our higher statute than the constitution of the United States. All people who served government taken oath, to support and defend the constitution. But this court has the last word on what that constitution means. That is not the typical pattern in parliamentary systems, where the legislature would have the last word. On what the fundamental instrument of government means. The idea judicial review for constitutionality i think is implicit in the constitutional document. But jon marshall, made it explicit in the great case of marbury against madison. Let me just ask you a couple of more questions. About the conference itself. Explain to us that room and what happens in that conference . Whos in there . Our Conference Room has a table where we all have a particular seat, the chief justice at one head, the most senior associate justice at the other, currently justice bought john paul stevens. When we discussed, we go around the room and seniority. The chief will summarize the case and give his take and view, and then the rest of us will say what we think about the case, how it should come out and why. Is there an argument that ensues . Generally there is limited argument. Initially we go around the table and each justice speaks, and there will be some but not a lot of cross conversation. One justice or another will say after weve talked for several minutes, it will all come out in the writing. It will come out in the writing, but this court produces is an opinion of the court. So youre not writing just for yourself, your writing hopefully for the entire court, not at least for the majority of the members and you have to take account of what they think. We dont have any observers in the Conference Room, no one can enter the room who is not a justice, secretary, no law clerk, not even a message. It would look strangely oldfashioned i think to most people, you will not see a laptop in that room. If notes are taken their taken by each justice individually, by hand, the conference is not recorded. Its just a private conversation amongst the justices about the case. But the public will see eventually is an opinion with the reasons. The discipline that a judge follows and what makes judges unlike legislatures judge. We dont just say i vote that the petitioner should win, or i vote the respondent should win. We have to give reasons for every decision we make, sometime in the process stating a reason you begin to say on my right did i overlook this question or that question. And not often, but sometimes injustice will say this opinion will not right, i was wrong at the conference, im going to take the other position. That justice will notify the rest of us, and we will live the room, and we agree to disagree and the justice will end up writing for the majority, for the dissent if we dont. Then what you would see in most Appellate Courts in the United States, except the tip the typical a couple of benches three, and its easier to have a conversation among three then among nine. So you have to respect that your colleagues are not there to hear along speech from you. We see we speak as i said in seniority order, so this term, im number seven. Next term all be number six. Its great to go first because you can tell the rest in a persuasive statement what you think of the case. But when youre on the end of that queue, you do have a certain advantage. That is, you know what the others think. And you can incorporate what they have said into your own a statement. About how the case should come out. Thank you justice ginsburg. Weeknights this month were featuring American History tv programs as a preview of whats available every weekend on cspan 3. On friday night, a look at the sun Supreme Court Historical Society founded in 1974, to collect and preserve the history of the nations highest court. We believe in the yellow law professor justin driver. On the 1956 southern manifesto, a document written by a congressional members who oppose the Supreme Courts 1954 brown versus board of education decision. Which role that segregated schools were unconstitutional. Watch friday beginning at 8 pm eastern. Enjoy American History tv, this week, and every weekend on cspan 3. Youre watching American History tv every weekend on cspan 3, explore our nations past, cspan 3 created by americas Cable Television companies as a public service, and brought to you today by your television provider. The competition is off, be a part of this year cspan student camp video competition, middle and High School Students to be the start of a national conversation, by making a five to six minute documentary exploring the issue you want the president and congress to address in 2021. The bold with your documentary, so supporting and opposing points of view and include cspan video. Be a winner, theres 100,000 dollars in total cash prices. Including a grand prize of 5000 dollars. The deadline to submit videos as january 20th 2021, the informed youll find competition rules tips, and more information on how to get started at our website. Student can. Org. Up next on American History tv, justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and sonia discuss the judicial impact of the first woman nominated to the when Sandra Day Oconnor. This conversation was part of an allday conference commemorating the 38th anniversary of Sandra Day Oconnor Senate Confirmation the Ronald Reagan president ial foundation posted this program. Good evening everyone on behalf of the Reagan Foundation institute thank you for joining us this evening. I have the pleasure of introducing our two panelists in just a moment. We have a number of distinguished guests with us i would like to take a breath to Justice Brett kavanaugh for joining us this evening. Today has been a time to celebrate the legacy of the first woman appointed to the United States Supreme Court, this evening we have the privilege of welcoming the second and the third. Were extraordinarily grateful to the justice justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and