Princeton, and oxford, and harvard for law, and served in the chambers of a law clark. All of our panelists this evening, clark for one judge or another in a decent circuit. All four of us. Its a good court. He was a great court. I was in the white house counsels office, and clinton administration. And the policy council as deputy director. She couldnt keep a job apparently. University of chicago law school, and then after getting tanya there she moved on inside at harvard. Not long after that became the dean of harvard law school. And then can get that job either. And became an associate solicitor general first, and then an associate justice of the Supreme Court. Judge uncle meyer at the far and, is in the district of new york, and has been since 2011. He came in the court on 20 twin. In 2011 in the southern district. He went to harvard, and to harvard for law school as well. Clerk for judge world on the d. C. Circuit. And was in the Solicitors Office with a solicitor general. And then was in private practice before going on the bench. And professor randall kennedy, to my left, who is a road scholar. Graduate of yellow law school. Also on the d. C. Circuit. Join the harvard faculty in 1984, and has been a very productive prolific author of books. Remarkably when most of his colleagues are writing arc to cool, shes writing books. And i thought of particular interest the American Academy of hearts in sizes, in the american philosophical association. So we have an array of three marshall clerks, for, including myself as well. I was there in 74 75. For d. C. Circuit clerics. And all of us, like virtually all of our other alumni, Justice Marshall chambers i think were very much affected in our careers and our lives by the experience of having in his chambers. And in close contact with him for a year. So were going to reminisce a little bit, if thats okay. Im not sure if there will be more to it than that. I hope that is of some interest. And so, i will start with you elena, unless you would like to pass. You didnt you did pass in class right . No never. Why dont you tell us about how your clerkship affected your career . Thats a big one. How it affected my career . I think clerk in on this court affects everybodys career, who doesnt, i mean its more than its just a fight. Its something that you put it on your resume in all of a sudden doors open. Sometimes justifiably so and sometimes not. But i think, you, know whats much more important to me is just how the experience of clerking for Justice Marshal affected who i was and what i thought was important. He was you couldnt survive a year in his chambers without realizing that there were things that you knew nothing about. And it was an eye opening experience in many respects, other than just learning about the law. And it gave you an appreciation for people who had fought for justice all their lives. In the importance of their work. Especially, his work. And it make you think about what you are doing and what you are doing it. And not that, you know, one could never hope to have a career that was sowed in so much justice seeking as he was. But i think his voice in my head never never went away, in terms of trying to figure out what i was doing and why. So you deal hear the call of knucklehead . Knucklehead wasnt a bad day. Sure he was on a good thing. laughs knucklehead you had to share with everyone else, surely was just yours. Paul . Do you have something on the same question about the arc of your career . Much of what she said, everything she said, i agree with. For my perspective if you came to the clerkship thinking about doing public service, and you spent a year with the greatest legal Public Center of the 20th century it would only ring employers that. Midway through the clerkship i spoke to him about applying to become an assistant u. S. Attorney not knowing how he would react to that. He was very delight, take he was enthusiastic. It turned out he was quite a big fan. And as it happened, by year three the four of us became assistant u. S. Attorneys right out of the clerkship. He was very encouraging of. That from my point of view, in addition to what alina said, hearing the stories about dry accords lit a fire under me to be a trial lawyer, and to engage with their craft of being in a courtroom. It reminded me of how important it was to know the facts and to know the record. One of the lessons you learn from just as marshall was that as important as the law was, facts are more important in most cases. Listening to the way he recounted the cases in his career and how decisive evidence. He really taught us as a lawyer that the craft of becoming one with the evidence. As a judge, i think about him almost every day. And i think about him in this context. I think about the defendants in my courtroom, the family members who are they are four sentences in pleads. In particular that this may be the only day for these people in which they are ever in a courtroom. And one of the things you learn from Justice Marshal is that you want to make sure that there is a decency and an honor and dignity that it tends to weigh in which the judge comport some self in court. So that for the people who are in a federal court for only one day in their life they leave feeling ennobled by the experience and treated fairly. That was very something something i learn from him and that i take with. Me and i have his picture up in my reception erie, in my chambers, its a picture of him on the steps of the Supreme Court on may 17th, 1954. And i walk in there every day, and i look at, it and it reminds me that we are in the justice business. I have a lithic graph of him as well in my office. Something that i am very pleased to have that i acquired not long after leaving the chambers. Randi . Well, he was a great pleasure working for Justice Marshall. Its made a big impact working for him has made a big impact on my career. I didnt know at the time that i was gonna be illegal academic but i turned out to be illegal academic. And one of the subjects that i right about is Race Relations law. And what could have been better preparation than working for Justice Marshal, long before he got on the bench before the civil rights. And over the course of the years, one of the rebenefits of working for him, was that he knew, he had seen everyone, he had many stories and he was very generous with his time. Very generous with his recollections. And i would just ask him lots of questions. And it turns out that much of what he shared with me became a views in my professional life as an academic. And still, very much of use. I say you have been drawn by mrs. Marshall. Welcome. Alayna i will come back to you if i may. Tell us about a memorable opinion of the justice . And whether you worked on it . Ill give you two, actually. One will be not surprising, and one maybe more surprising to folks. And both were the year that i clerk for Justice Marshall. We used to call him judge, we actually never called him just as marshall. So heres the one that maybe wont be so surprising. This was one that really brought on the knucklehead appalachian. It was a case called cutter moss, and it was about a school girl a ten year old, 12yearold girl in rural kansas, i believe it was. And she lived some miles away, more than 15 miles away, from the nearest school. And there was a bus service, but they made you pay. And they wouldnt give a waiver even for indigenous students, so there is old with that this cold didnt get to school. And there was a challenge brought to the fee schedule. The idea of a charging fees for the school bus, which was absolutely necessary for her to get to school. And it was a constitutional challenge broad under the equal protection clause. And we walked into his office, when i laid out the arguments and i said to him judge, i just think that its going to be hard for, i think her name was serena, to win. And he looked at me and said why . And i said well you know, indigenous sea is not a suspect class, and education is not a fundamental right. So that means rational basis applies and the state has a rational basis here. And he looked at me as the as though i must have lost my mind. Because his basic idea of what he was there to do was sort of to ensure that people like serena got to school every morning. And as long as he was gonna be on this court he was going to vote to make that happen. Wait dissented in that case, the jested descended, i think it was a six to three or a seven to two opinion. Most of the court decided the case, just as i basically laid it out to him. And Justice Marshall wrote a dissent. And the reason i say i was called knuckled hate quite a lot with this case is because of all the cases that i worked a lot, it was one that he was most passionate about. You know, the idea of, what moved him more than anything was trying to get rid of these entrenched inequalities in american life. This one didnt involve race but it was a little bit the same to him ,. ,. To i think one surprise you, but i think one that will surprise you is also that turn. It was a case called tories, and it was a group of hispanic employees that had brought unemployment discrimination suit. And they had lost, and they had filed an appeal. In the secretary to the lawyer handling the appeal left out one of their names on the notice of appeal that went up to the court and the question was whether of leaving out the name was going to mean that the court had a note jurisdiction to hear the appeal of this one employee of the group. The case came to us, and all the clerks thought this was an easy case, and the answer should be its just a secretarial misstep. And youre going to deprive this man of his claim . What a crazy thing. And in fact, this justice thought it was just crazy, and justice burn and descended from the case. But this martial ended writing the opinion for the court in that case. Saying that yes, in fact, the court did leaving out the name made all the difference. And the court did not have the jurisdiction to take the appeal. And this is what he said to us he said he spent his whole life litigating cases, and you cant expect anybody to bend the rules for you. The only thing you can expect is that they apply the rules straight. And indeed people you know people who litigated like i litigated their salvation was in the rules. I mean, if he had a chance for success it was because of the. Rules and because people decided to take those roles seriously. To him it was one of the most important principles for the justice system. Sometimes they worked with him, sometimes it with their own name, but in the end especially for people who were disliked in who were disadvantaged they needed the rules. And so you better make sure that youve created a system where the rules were there. And i dont think he convinced a single one of us, honestly. But, it was a powerful lesson for me actually. As much more so as listening to him talk about serena in the bus. And the importance of education. And the importance of eradicating inequality. This two, a powerful lesson about the importance of rules. And of law in our society. And even when sometimes it doesnt cut your way. Comment on those lines . Sure, there was one decision that i think he was most passionate about in our term. Which was at richmond versus carlson, a case in which to court adapted scrutiny for racial classifications, for affirmative action racial classification. And he was very, as you can imagine, distressed by the outcome there. One of the things was interesting to me was not just his fundamental point, that informative action is different from official racism. But his focusing. On the facts. He said to me, as the clerk assigned to the system on the case, i want to make it. Sure in the very first part of this decision, on the very first paragraph, that we make a point that this is the capital of the confederacy. And i wanna make a point that there is something ironic here about historically, the capital of. Confidentiality bending backwards to do something progressive about race. And that is what it we saw throughout the years. He was deeply knowledgeable as a historian, and he wanted to make sure we came out of the chambers with rich history and rich in social context. Thats one of the distinct memories i have. My favorite case. My favorite opinion from the justice is a concurring opinion. It was a concurring opinion in the case called baths versus kentucky. And in this disappearing court of the United States reversed and earlier with pinion, swinging versus alabama. The court said that cream cree challenges, a prosecutor use of privacy challenges was immune from question. And the defense attorney said he wanted to challenge the prosecutor used, saying they had been based on race. And the court said well, they are just immune from question. If a prosecutor is using them for a related reasons, any reason whatsoever, thats okay. Well, this two things about young exposed mean and baths for sikh kentucky. Yeah first of all, thought but thats weird because ive been on it all it was triggered night i went for by the justices use of descent a break worries teach from the social rural. Typical people dont Pay Attention to this, but the justice issued to sent after dissent, after descent. Basically to alert the bar that there were at least a couple of justices that were interested in the issue. And secondly, i think to educate and try to persuade his colleagues. And over the course of the year he succeeded. He succeeded in persuading other justices to come along with him and he triggered a reassessment of this case. And then the court agreed with his position, agreed to reverse but then the justice wasnt satisfied with. That he wrote a concurring opinion in which he say or gray with what the court is doing, but the court is not going foreign enough. They should get rid of these challenges all together. And he was pushing the envelope now brings a smile on my face and makes me think of thats the justice through the marshall. That i revere. Since you mention two sorts of opinions, ill mention one other. Its not just what opinion, it is a series. So Justice Marshall came to the conclusion, that Capital Punishment is in all circumstances a violation of constitutional standards. So he dissented, in all Capital Punishment cases, in which somebody was sentenced to death. And that stand to, its a stand that makes me salute him. Let me ask you to elaborate about that, because Justice Marshall and Justice Brennan reiterated that dissent in every case it came along. As opposed to, the tentative view that one something is settled, and whether dissented or were something or thats it. Was this do you think it was, was this because it was Justice Marshall or because it was Capital Punishment, or what was it about. I think it was largely because it was Capital Punishment, and just as marshall was such an unusual person. He had such a broad long very clear you know he had represented people who faced Capital Punishment and he had represented people, who were executed though they ought not to have been executed. He is a person who represent people who were put to death, though in fact they were innocent. And i think that has something to do with the fervency, and passion with which he saw this particular issue. There were many issues, in which he was deeply impassioned but none more so than the question of the government taking someones life. Can i get in on that. Please. I think it reflects a deeper view that he had, after all he was a lawyer who got plessy reversed in brown. And he would say to us, this is a living constitution, and when it matters we ought to not feel impeded from reassessing it. If you look at the speech he gave on the bicentennial of the constitution he says exactly that, and that the glory of the constitution is its amenability. That it was refreshing 1868, and it took too long a time but that eventually the court got it right. So absolutely. The Capital Punishment based on his own personal experience, as a criminal defense lawyer was something he care deeply about, but there is also a philosophical you not to be locked in to what he regarded as a wrong decision. Im not sure that everyone is fully aware, that the justice spent by far the better part of a larger part of his career, trying criminal cases. Defending rape and murder charges. Time after time in very unsafe venues for him. I remember once he said, he said when a jury brought back a sentence of life imprisonment, thats when he absolutely knew that the guy was innocent. laughs . A well he told a lot of stories, from that period and others in his life. Im not sure whether this was true, but his practice when i was there with bill brison, and Karen Hasting williams, was to come back from lunch, and come back into the bullpen three of us in one room, sit down on a leather easy chair, and start talking. Maybe for 30 or 45 minutes, virtually every day. And telling stories. And there was some repetition over the course of the year, but he had a huge repertoire. And those stories, were unforgettable. Was he doing that when you are there . He did, and he didnt so much come into the clerks office, but we would go into his office when we will talk about cases, and the way it typically works is that we will talk about whatever was on the court schedule. Many more cases that are now on the court schedule, about 140. 160 when i was there. Yes and, he will talk about the cases and then at some point we would be finished and he would segue, into what was sort of story time and injustices marshals chambers and it was the most unforgettable experience and my one regret of the year, was not one of us was smart enough to write them all down. Because im sure ive forgotten 95 of them. And i will tell you dog, i dont think he ever repeated one. It was remarkable. It was remarkable how many stories he had and how kind of how he remembered what he had been through before. But a lot of them i couldnt begin to capture a lot of it. He was really the greatest storyteller that ive ever come across. And it was a kind of make you make you laugh and make you weep, because a lot of the stories he told were pretty rough and pretty hard. And there were stories about, his boyhood. Stories about what it had been like to crisscross the gym crow south as a trial lawyer. And often fearing physical danger, from mobs, from the police and they were terrible stories. A lot of them. But he also was a great comic storyteller, and a great comic generally. He was so darn funny. In his facial expressions, in his intonations and sometimes you are kind of laughing and saying what am i laughing about this is a horrible story, but it was an unforgettable experience that the content of the stories he had to tell, and just and listening to a master storyteller tell them. I will elaborate on that of all the tories hes told which manned brown and the theorizing and strategizing that got there, but the statistics in my mind today i the idea of being a criminal defense attorney in mississippi and alabama and florida and the physical risk he took he talked almost he talked about almost getting lynched himself oneself. At that he almost got lynched. And arriving at bus or train stations, and being talked and being taken into the back seat of a car, should be taken to the supporters home. And sometimes moved once or twice in the middle of the night, just to stay safe. And then hes telling jokes about this. And over one time he said to us, how can you tell theres easy way to tell if a confession has been coerced, asked the question, how big was the cop . Then another time he tells a story about choking with another member of his legal team, about who is going to sleep nears to the window in case a bomb got thrown in. He is making this funny and as were saying its horrifying stories but its how he drove the stories and if you havent read devil in the grove, thats the single best opportunity to recapture all of these stories or many of them in about a 200 page right up. It captures what it was like for him to have almost you know these to kill a mockingbird moment as a defensive turning in the south in the early forties and fifties. The story that i remember the most, was a story about his experience in tennessee, after world war ii there were black veterans defending themselves and they were charged he defended them and you got most of them off and the police got angry with him and he was leaving the courthouse, and hes with another lawyer by the end of alexander blue b. Justice marshall is driving, and the local police pull him over, and hustle into their car. And the police tells the person to stop alexander to stop following the police. Because he was falling and falling following. And according to justice martial he thought he was a goner for sure. He thought he was gonna be turned over to the ku klux klan, and then the police got cold feet because this alexander was following. So they got back to town, and he charged Justice Marshal with driving under the influence. They go to a local magistrate, and the local magistrate says why you bring this man here, and the police say well this man was driving under the influence. And the magistrate says, i can tell right away with this man is driving under the influence, he says breathing to my friend do my into my face. And so Justice Marshall axis out any breeze. It doesnt flinch, and he says this man has not touched a drop of whiskey. Release him. And Justice Marshall gets in the car, and drives off and gets where hes going, calls the naacp, and says you know what, i had not touched any whiskey, before but now im about to get drunk. Again its a horrible story, and its also a true story, theres a book about this particular this particular event. But he always punctuated it with his owned with his own brand of humor. I will contribute a couple, and the stories would use a harsher hard, but not in the language necessary, or even in the events, but one was i think it was a rape trial in florida, black defendant, and white complainant. And the jury went to deliberate, and the prosecutor came over to Justice Marshall and said, you see the bailiff over there, lighting a cigar . Yeah i see. Says what about. I bet you five dollars that the jury comes in, within two minutes of the time he finishes that cigar. So what is that got to do anything, how long does it take to smoke cigars . He says while those jury members have been sitting there all day and they like to have a cigar to. And thats the kind of stories. It stays with you. And the other one was i think its one of the books, it might be in lawrence fishermans play up im not sure but he came out of the courthouse in texas about an hours drive from dallas, where we were staying. So he was driving there in the morning, being driven there and he picked up by the Highway Patrol somewhere along the way. Escorted all the way to the courthouse. And when he came out at the end of the day, he was also a police car there that followed him to someplace halfway back to dallas. And then dropped off. And when this happened a second day that he got to the courthouse, he went back to talk to the driver of the police car. He said, what is going on . He described what i just described. In the sheriff deputy said, sharon says you are not to get killed in this county. laughs what was your First Impression when you met the justice . My first conversation with the justice actually came before i met him. At that time he picked clerks without interviewing them, he had some former clerks who did his clerkship selection. So i had been through their process and he had decided to make me a job offer and he called me it was the summer after i graduated from law school. And he called me i remember the call came into the law review offers, and i had to run and finally, and i came back, and found a phone. And finally, i got on the phone, and he said so you want to job . And i say i love a job. And he said, whats that you already have a job . laughs and i was like oh my gosh, he didnt hear me. I said id love a job, and i dont have a, job and i want this job. I dont know if you already have a job. And i went through this three or four time before i said oh he figured it out, and he drooping, on the and im not sure what happened first but the only other thing i remember about that conversation, before he hung up the phone, what he said well i hope you like writing dissents. And we did right or share of the sense that year. Last year, i felt special, let me tell you. I was in the office when he played that inaudible . laughs what about your First Impression, paul, or randall . Similar phone call, without the you already have a job. But he said to me, he stole on the job . And i said yes, and he said what you got it, get ready to write to science. And then he got off the phone. And i was a Summer Associate for a law firms studying for the bar, and they saw happened in maybe 35 seconds. And there was quality of Somebody Just pull a prank on me, i dont know if this really happened. And i spent the next hour trying to figure out where you go in washington to confirm that Thurgood Marshall just give you a job offer. laughs i had a similar telephone call. I remember the first time i met Justice Marshal face to face, and i was very nervous about it. Very nervous. Because and the reason i was just it was a big deal any of it, meaning adjust. Is a person you will work for. But he was even bigger than that for me. Because i heard about martial all my life, because my father in columbia, south carolina, went to see Justice Marshall argue a case. Rice versus el moore. He was one of the last of the white primary cases. And throughout my childhood, i heard my father talk about the importance of that case for him. My dad we didnt know what the legal issue, the big legal issue state action issue. He didnt pay any attention to that. The thing that my father talked about over, and over, and over again was that the judges in the courtroom called Thurgood Marshall mr. Marshall. And the reason why that was so significant is that because of jim crow etiquette, black men were not referred to as mr. If you were a black physician, you might be called dr. So and so, if you are a black minister, you were called reverend soandso. But typically blackmon did not get the honorific mr. And it was a sign of how distinguished Thurgood Marshall was. That the judges, in the other lawyers, called him mr. Marshall. I heard about that all the time growing up. And so with that backdrop, of course, it was a tremendous. Was a part of white became a lawyer . In part, im sure. My father just again im sure it influenced my brother, i have an older brother whos a lawyer. But we just heard about, we heard about that argument 100 times i dont know whether its in one of the books but there is a story about the justice needed when he was practicing in the fifties, he needed to revive some sort and he needed to see the chief justice. And the chief justice was not to be found. But he knocked on a door, in a hotel in connecticut, where the big conventions often are. Anyway, we hotel. Theyre not on the door mayflower someone had given him the tip. He went in and there was a chief justice playing poker. He was playing poker with president truman into other man. I dont know who they were. He went over to chief justice and opened up, he must have an f a dated under it because the chief looked up and said mister marshall, is all of this true . And he goes yes or. Signed the paper. Left. Never notice that it was the president in the room. laughs never said anything to him, or if he noticed he didnt say anything to him. Those were the days. He learned about it afterwards. A little bit more informal the way we did business back then. I remember him telling the story with the chief jested thats that if you have the guts to open that door have the guts to sign. Much better, thank you. Any First Impression, when you finally men, and randy . Come with a large man, and very imposing. I think nowadays, sometimes the views you get it sort of an evolving killer completely welcoming, he was a tough boss. And intimidating. And he definitely laid down how he wanted things done. And you knew how he wanted things done, and you paid attention. So i mean, from the getgo, with me any of it, i was very attentive to it. And overtime, i suppose, the intimidation went away. But i always found an imposing. I think it was the combination of his physical stature, manner, and just knowing of him as a historical figure, essentially. Thats why im so intimidating, or at least overwhelming at first. Much to same. As intimidating as he was, i think back also on how accessible he, he was though. In the sense that he really understood what his clerk was thinking, about about the historical events he was recounted. He certainly didnt lie the ball, and in the roughest language, the most explicit language, he would tell you who the here is, were live villains. Where what he thought about the advocacy we had just seen. He would share views about colleagues, he would read a letter that he was about to send to the chief about the holiday party. I have a copy of this. Essentially the following, the your chief as usual i will not attend the annual christmas party. So, he was letting us into the tents. You know i appreciate it that give us access to his take on just about everything. You know he cared allot about what we thought about things, he listen to us he asked us questions, and it was a real dialog between the clerks. And gosh did he know who was boss he would point over to any say whats over there could you take a look at that and whose names on that commission . Then he had this other thing where sometimes people would say, you know you have to do x or wires editor and youd have to do something or vote for mr. Torres or something, and hed say theres only two things that i have to do. Stay black and i. He didnt repeat stories but that expression he repeated a lot. He had another one to, that was along those lines. I remember once, arguing with him about a case and he said thank you very much and sort of put his hand up and i said well let me try again, and i did the couple of times. And finally i said Justice Marshall, you know two years ago you said this, and if you go the way that you want to go that your proposing to go, itll be just completely contradicting what you said two years ago. And he looks at me and he says, do i have to be a fool all my life . Doug laughs . Before i forget i want to say about the stories, as many as there were, i never heard one in which he was the hero. It was just totally what happened. Yeah you have to look at up afterwards, to find out no. But he was not self aggrandizeing in any way, and he very much wanted to pass on to us and ultimately, well beyond us a real sense of what it was like for him. And many years later he did tell the stories, and talk about it and talk about a lot of things that he hadnt talked about for publication before. I thought the only thing, the only jarring note in that whole book, was a subtitle of the book. It was Thurgood Marshall, american revolutionary. Revolutionaries dont follow the rules, there on the streets. And he had no affection for people out in the streets. None. And im sure that randy has some thoughts on this, about his relationship with the Civil Rights Movement generally. Well it was a complex one. On the one hand, he was mr. Civil rights and over a long period of time, through just extraordinary work and amazing diligence and persistence along with extraordinary skill, created the groundwork for the civil rights revolution. At the same time, he was you know he viewed the world very much through a lawyers lens. And his way of doing things, was to attack through the courts what you didnt like, and have those things invalidated, and after the invalidated, then you know he was not a fan of direct action. And there was tension i think, that was documented, there was tension between him and the students you know the people who engaged in sitins. The there was tension between him and Martin Luther king junior, and there was tension and he respected them, and they with good reason, respected him. And to move the world, in a way that the champions of the Civil Rights Movement move the world, you need all sorts of people. You needed division of labor, you need people who saw things in different ways, and push in different ways. But yeah, it was a complex relationship with some of the other members of the champions you know of racial justice. The division of labor, reminds me that there is one of the clerks in my years, the division of labor among the clerks. What was it. Phil bison to call the criminal and criminal procedure cases. That served him well. And karen took all the civil rights and related anything related quake cases, and i got what was left. And that was international case, and labor and securities, and you know there was never a moment in which in which we had any disagreement or had to work out what he wanted to say. Because we were completely on the same wave length. In that respect, he was a conservative person. He was not trying to upset the securities laws, or make waves just to make waves. The way he did it with us, he made it very clear early on, that we were to be looking over one another shoulders. So early elm early on, if i met one a few i met all of you. So he said if i am mad at all of you at one of you actually i met all of you. And we are particularly aware, that his intolerance of his intolerance of lateness. You could not be late. One minute was too late. And so, he had this collective feeling. And one other thing i want to say about this, and i had to do with my remarks about Capital Punishment. On the night, of an execution, it would almost be one clerk who had to stick around for anything late breaking. And some of the time, when everything had been done, the person who had to stick around had to call up the justice at his home, and on those occasions, and i did a bunch, because my fellow clerks all three of them, were married and i was not married. So i volunteered to stick around. You know nobody was looking for me. And on those evenings, when i would call the house i would pray that mrs. Marshall would answer, i would pray that she would answer, because it made a big difference. The difference made was this. If mrs. Marshall answered the phone, the justice would come on and he would be very civil. He would be very nice, very polite very civil. If she did not answer the phone, and you got to him first it could be a very tough conversation. I remember about the capital cases, that his charge to us was not merely to execute the formal dissent based on his categorical view. He said i want you to come each of these cases, to see if theres some specific ground that we can get this stay reversed. This was not an abstract thing for him, and those phone calls also king with the question, have you dug into, this is something specific about this case you can say. One of my most vivid memories, because for many reasons the Capital Punishment work played and even more significant role in the court than it does today. First off there were more executions, and they would usually be you know several executions a week at that time. And there was you know there are fewer procedural bars, so a lot of what we do now, so people on death row come up, and there is no way to even hear the merits of the claims because since that Time Congress has put into place a whole lot of rules that me and many many more claims are nor than they were then. And i think the third thing was that, a Death Penalty law at that time, was much less well developed, so it was a lot more open spaces in terms of what was allowed and what was not allowed. They were really quite a lot of these executions, and there was a very serious issue that remained open, and you could get to. And randy talked about since four denial in one area of law, but there wasnt just a typical thing that he and Justice Brennan used to do, about how do we go again . Just the one liner . I forget how it went but. A system with my something. Yeah yeah. But we spent we drafted somebody dissents from denial, in Death Penalty cases that year. I would be surprised if we didnt do 25 of them, or 30 of them in a year. I must have been there, either i was completely oblivious, or during that happy period when there was no cases in 74 and 75. Yeah. Thank goodness. And children were are you . How much time do we have . Thats fine but instead of a question, what do you tell us what your favorite recollection of the year is, not just in chambers but of the year that you spent here . Let somebody else start on this. Ill start, and this isnt outside of chambers memory, holiday time late wednesday, he told us he was going to take us out to lunch the following day and a Seafood Restaurant. We get into a car, we go to a Seafood Restaurant and we walk into the restaurant, hes leading the way and as Thurgood Marshall walked into this packed dining room, you could see people begin to realize who had walked in, and slowly one by one, and then everybody got up and stood for him. And they stood for him for maybe 60 seconds. And he nodded and everyone sat down, but it was a moment that allowed you to see him the way the world saw him. And it reminded you that this is not your ordinary Supreme Court justice. This was a living legend. And there were moments of that throughout the year, when tourist or other people walk into him and, you know it makes you realize so that put aside what weve been talking about and forget about story time, forget about the individual cases, but this is the magnitude of the man. This is what he is meant to our country. And i think we all saw again, after you passed away and his clerks had the enormous honor of working as a honor guard. And we had we all took a shift, as people streamed in. And people were overly and generally they were overtly emotional. And they would leave things there but you could sense just the gratitude to him and the enormous space that he occupied in the 20th century. So my story, really is having that window of an opportunity to look at him through others eyes. Doug i guess i would echo that, and say that probably the most enduring, snapshot half of that year was on the very last day, that i work for him. Because on that day and i mentioned earlier my father my father had come to court that day. And the justice was very nice to my dad, and my dad talked about rice versus all more. And seeing him. And they had a very nice top and these two people, whom ive revered, and the memory of that has a deep memory with me. I also remember when my parents came to the court and he was nicer to me that day than he was before. Or. Since that was the only day that i knew he liked me. laughs well, thank you all for being here for this hour in the tribute to the justice. I hope there will be many more in the future with others, carrying the stories forward as long as we can. Thank you. It was a privilege for us. applause my name is jim ohara, and i am a member of the board, and of the executive committee of the Supreme Court historical society. The society is deeply honored to be the host of tonights National Heritage lecture. A few observations before the ending is over. First, justice kagan, judge game spurred, judge angle meyer, professor kennedy, thank you for your insights and stories of your time with justice Thurgood Marshall. This has been a warm and wonderful evening, and i am honored to have been part of it. The National Heritage lecture is sponsored each year by the Supreme Court historical society, the White House Historical society, in the United States capital historical society. Since 1991, when justice delivered a rousing talk on president roosevelts 1937 court packing. The organizations have rotated hosting duties each year. This evenings National Heritage lecture is of course a celebration of justice Thurgood Marshall 50 years after his ascension to the Supreme Court. The society, all of us here are deeply honored to be joined this evening by his wife, cecilia marshall, his sons Thurgood Marshall junior in john marshall, his daughterinlaw jean marshall, and his grandson Edward Patrick marshall. Thank you so much for being here. And honoring us with your presence. applause i think all of you for coming. And please join us in the reception in the eastern west conference rooms, which are directly to your right, as you leave the room tonight. We will be serving two recipes from justice and mrs. Marshal that are featured in this societys most recent publication table for two. We are serving Justice Marshals maryland crab soup, and mrs. Marshals mango bread. Copies of tables for nine are available at the societies gives up along with many other books and many other gifts. There is a gift shop on the ground floor of the court. And it will remain open well after the reception tonight. Ladies and gentlemen, the 2018 National Heritage is now adjourned. American history tv on cspan three. Exploring the people and events that tell the american story every weekend. Coming up this weekend, saturday at 2 pm eastern, the white house conference on American History. With President Trump september 17 executive order establishing a National Commission to promote patriotic education. Then at 5 05 pm eastern a look at nazi persecution and murder of the disabled with patricia rice of the u. S. Holocaust memorial museum. Sunday at 4 pm eastern on real america, a series of archival films on wildfires, firefighters and fire prevention. And at 6 30 pm eastern, watch the 1984 Vice President ial debate. Exploring the american story, watch American History tv dissed weekend on cspan 3. Every saturday at 8 pm eastern on cspan 3, go inside a Different College classroom and hear about topics ranging from the american revolution, civil rights, and u. S. President s. To 9 11. Thanks for your patience, and for logging into class. With most College Campuses closed due to the impact of coronavirus, watch professors transfer teaching to a virtual setting to engage with our students. Reagan met him halfway, reagan encouraged him, reagan supported him. The freedom of the press which we will get to later, their freedom of the use of the press, and it is indeed the freedom to print things and publish things, and is not a freedom for what we referred to institutionalized press. Lessons in history, on American History tv on cspan three. Every saturday, at 8 pm eastern. Lectures in history is also available as a podcast, find it where you listen to podcasts. Youre watching cspan 3, youre unfiltered me of government. Created by americas Cable Television companies as a public service. And brought to you today by your television provider. The un charter resigned on june 26 1945 in the san francisco, by more than 40 nations. Up next, on American History tv, a united news rail documenting the founding meeting of the united nations