For 45 years. And this book talks not only about that life in law but also about your political history and a lot of personal stuff on the issue of personal stuff i should disclose the beginning i was your law clerk some wraps around 40 years ago, a long time ago. And you also officiated at my wedding so we been good personal friends for a while as well tread to a law clerk relationships one of the great perks being a judge. I have had 95 locks or expert you are one of the very first seven have gone on to become judges, 14 are tenured professors at leading all schools, and one is a United States senator. Only one is a standard so far and that is you of course. But there may be others. Host let me begin by asking you how you decided to write this memoir, sort of a very personally insightful view of your own life. Guest its occurred to me sometime ago that almost everyone should write a memoir. As i get a little older, 50, 60 or so there are recollections that your children and grandchildren, everyones grandchildren need to know. Youve told so pick your children, and grandchildren and you told them a lot of things as everyone does but there are details that you probably havent told them. And when is hope you will and others will sit down to write a memoir, you will recall the details that they need to know. I was after my father to do it for years and he wouldnt do it. He finally did at age 90. He wrote a lovely very personal memoir which told us things about his growing up that none of us knew. So i think not only was i collect of a chance to do, i think everyone should do it for the own family. Host did it take you long time to do it . Guest it did. I started this about 12 years ago. I didnt work on a daily by any means. I have a day job, and i worked on from time to time. Essentially finished up about three years ago but it was a process evolving over about a 12 year time frame. Host speak of the day job used to our an active judge even though you have senior status . Guest senior status as you know means what you get to be a certain age in the federal system you allowed to elect to become a senior judge. That means you can adjust the volume under cases as much or as few as you want. You dont pick your cases. We never picked our cases that we can pick the days we sit and we just take what comes those days. Its probably the greatest semi retirement in the history of the world because you keep your job when youre on the court that day, youre doing exactly what and what else is doing but you dont have to do as much. Host you are indistinguishable when youre sitting. Guest for the lawyers that makes the difference. Were fullfledged judge but we just dont have to do as much as the others. Host speaking of being active, you are 85 years old, remarkable also. You still play tennis and some golf, and so no one should doubt that you are very, very active and vibrant as you always have been tragic i think thats true. Host let me go back to the beginning, so to speak, and ask what do you to the law as a profession for you as a way of life now after all these years you devoted so much of yourself to the law, the legal system, justice or the Justice System. Guest i think the law was almost like a jerk. Main interest went to college and law school was public servant. I didnt have a precise notion of what opportunities i would have. Most people dont. Its just luck of the draw the kitchen somewhere. I thought law school was probably an entree into different opportunities that might include Public Service. It turned out that was true but it dont think anyone set their sights on being a a judge becae the odds of becoming a judge our long and its a fatuity when you get to be one. But i was lucky enough to have different opportunities. I worked at the Supreme Court as you did, law clerk. I got into state politics as you did. I was u. S. Attorney as you were. We travel a lot of the same paths, and then added the next with a set of circumstances a district judgeship opened up and because i i had a close relationship within senator robocalls he sponsored me for the judgeship, and that led to a position on use court of appeals for the Second Circuit, 36 years ago, and thats thats where i am now. Host i want to get to the center because he was a mentor to you as it was to me. An extraordinary man at a very different time politically. And press you could talk a bit about a book rubalcaba and that his relationship to john bailey and how politics was different than then it is now especially for somebody like him a cared so much about policy and the development of others in Public Service. Well, they were really the ideal political team. He was the candidate and bailey was the political person. He was the state chairman, became the National Chairman. They consummated each other brilliantly. Ribicoff understood the political or how to do certain political chores and the political leader new the candidate had to be out there leading the way on issues. He was bailey sort of the prototypical oldline political boss which some people regard as the majority. I dont. He was state chairman 25 years. Who did he run for office . Here at chester bowles, and ribicoff 50 new issues report. The issue in 1959 when i first worked at the legislature was court reform of all things. Not Many Political leaders are for court reform. Ribicoff understood that was a big issue. They really went along with it. And they each knew what the other have to do for them both to be successful. Host but you tell remarkable story in the book about ribicoff considering abolishing the court of common pleas try to yes. Host knew that bailey would absolutely abhor guest yes, sort of a summit meeting during the debate about the bill and ribicoff some a bunch of people to get office, Democratic Leaders, republican leaders, the state bar. I was working for bailey, not ribicoff it were sitting in the back of the room and the state bar chairman said to the governor, governor, a way for proposal, i think we should go father, i think we should replace it with a new superior court system. I looked up and i saw ribicoff going like this to me in the back of the room. I walked up and you whisper to me, he said, do you think we can go for this . I knew the court of common pleas was a source of great patronage. He had naming the prosecutors. Although i was only what, 26 been, 27, a little brazen, i whispered governor, i said i think if you go for this, mr. Bailey is going to swallow his cigar and choke to death writer in your office. And he kept his mother a a loot that mean he said, he thinks of . I said yes, i do. He turned back to the crowd and said well, i think thats an interesting proposal but we need a lot of study and we will move on. And we moved on. But weve asked the court reform bill. Eventually the court dash it was a big issue and replaced, the records run by crushers and hardware salesman at all kinds of people. We created, they created a court of fulltime lawyers, confessional court, still exist today. Has a different name now. I was a 20foot incredible justice in connecticut. Host i think the wonderful aspect of the story it shows the partnership between the political boss and the politician, both in the best sense of the word. Guest the governor got the bill he was most interested in and bailey resisted the added step which would make him politically. Host john bailey was responsible for those three that you mentioned, but also for john f. Kennedy. Maybe you could about that . Guest well, ribicoff and bailey were both for john f. Kennedy early on in the 1956 convention with john kennedy ran for Vice President , which he lost which body was a good thing. I dont think he would have been nominated, then Vice President ial candidate frankly. In fact, there was a time in the 60 convention in los angeles when a tv reporter came to the connecticut delegation, and as they do, they thrust the mic in front of him and he said and oldline, he said when is the connecticut delegation going to caucus . This old veteran said we caucused in 1956. [laughing] so they go way back with kennedy and they both were instrumental in his nomination. And it was significant that ribicoff a jew was for john kennedy the roman catholic, in fact, there it was in store men i think pittsburgh among the Democratic Leaders in 58 or 59, all catholic except ribicoff. They doubted john kennedy could win the election. Host that john f. Kennedy turkey right. They remembered how smith. Ribicoff said i i thought i wod ever see the day when a jew would have to tell catholic leaders of the catholic could be president. Host in those days balancing the ticket in terms of religion really mattered and religion mattered particularly in that election to john f. Kennedy because had to convince people that he would not be a catholic president tragedy thats right. Made a historic speech about in the campaign. Host then when ribicoff was elected, he was elected governor. He helped to elect john f. Kennedy as president and a lot of folks expected him to be attorney general. Guest they did. Host and what are the questions i had been reading your book was by ribicoff decided to be secretary of health, Education Welfare as it was then no, now it is secretary of health and Human Services . Guest he and i went around the country during the 60 campaign and everywhere we went people said Lyndon Johnson who was been running for Vice President told us governor, you will be attorney general. And in the south bay like that because he was perceived as a moderate. When the election was over and kennedy invited him to hyannisport and asked pointblank, what job in the cabinet do you want . I think the others held their breath waiting for standard because they thought he wanted to be attorney general. And he said to the president , daily position i would even consider is secretary of Health Education and both of it when asked about the lid he said look, i had to interest whatsoever in being the attorney general. He said i dont want to be a law enforcer. Thats not my style. He said to be hcw, health Education Welfare, was sort of a bigger governorship. They were the education issues, health issues, welfare, first agencies. It was like being the governor only on a national scale. He said that appealed to me. And so we did it for that reason. Although he did became very disillusioned not because of the issues picky love the issues. He liked the education, medicate. He was a big proponent of medicare before it became law. What you didnt like was being a cabinet officer having to deal with white house staff. Host he did want to take orders from someone else. Guest correct. Host when you say became disillusioned, he became pretty frustrated. Guest he became frustrated. There was a key day when we tried to get a new Education Bill and the talk to the white house about it, we think we have day we can get the votes. The white house it all right. To the secretary, you go up there and larry obrien and the legislative liaison will go with you. Ten minutes before were due to go to the got a call from the white house, larry is not going with you. Ribicoff was furious and i think thats the moment he decided on going to go home and one for the senate. Host you are working with them as his chief assistant while he was in the cabinet. When he went home you manage his campaign for the United States senate. Guest 62, you turn what did you came back to washington. How was the experience different from being his assistant while he was in the cabinet . Guest they are very different. As you know being a senator, the cabinet your city on top of the vast bureaucracy, h. E. W. Within 75,000 people. It unimaginably difficult, even though it doesnt have education today, my guess is there are more people there now. Senate office is much smaller. Yours is not bigger than ours was but its a relatively small office. And instead of dealing with the bureaucracy you dealing with 99 of the senators. So the dynamics of the relationships are entirely different. You are trying to work out the details of legislation, see what can be accomplished. It was in those days much more bipartisanship that i think there is now as i read the papers. I can remember when the administration set up a bill on civil rights at it had a key title, its been called title vi, still is, on eliminating segregation in federally financed programs. The original part of the kennedy bill was terrible, frankly and ribicoff said suit which you can do to make it better. The first thing i did was call a friend who worked for a republican senator, keating, and we worked out an improvement bill across party lines. There was a question about doing it that way. Try what can keating of new york turkey right. Republican, and are to assist and Work Together can work out the bill, became title vi thats in the mall today. Its a much stronger version that kennedy had said that the 1961. Host in the book you make the observation that in some since you are proudest of the civil rights legislation that was achieved during the relatively brief time that you were guest the most significant thing i worked on, yes. Host there came a point where there was an opening for United States attorney. Guest there was. Host until about how that happened and guest there was a judge was nominated for the District Court to the Second Circuit, judge anderson, abuse attorney became a district judge. We did know anything about it because ribicoff was at the gym center. We did know anything about it. Junior senator was senator dodd. I got this note official white house document announcing those two positions. Well, i did know much about it but it occurred to me that met the was a vacancy for u. S. Attorney. I walked in to the senator and a shooting and i said you think i would have any chance of getting that . He gave me a notable answer which i remember verbatim picky set listen, if you want a position you had have to tell n the next ten seconds. I said, well, ive given it a lot of thought and, yes, i would like to try. He called up john bailey the was the National Chairman at the point and the agreement was reached, and in a few weeks i became the United States attorney. Host and you enjoyed that job . Guest it was a fabulous job as you know. Its a marvelous lawyers job. You have great client, the United States of america. Your client doesnt bother you. You do have relations with the department of justice but they basically dont bother you. You have the awesome responsibility of deciding whether to launch a prosecution or not, which is a critical decision in the Law Enforcement process. The office of small enough i got to try cases. Many u. S. Attorneys dont try to own cases. I tried my own. It was a small office. So it was fun it was relevant. It was important work, very satisfying. Host one of the most important pieces of advice you gave me was to try cases, which i did, and thats what of the reasons why i posted is the best job ive ever had, bar none. But you have going on tv i United StatesDistrict Court judge and the judge on the court of appeals. As the judge of 45 years having gone from that active life of making decisions and going to court and advocating a case to judging, was that a difficult transition for you . And did you ever miss the life of advocacy, so to speak . Guest it wasnt difficult. It has been for simplifying gnome. Ive known people who became judges and so disliked the decisionmaking process that they left the bench. I was an advocate. I was glad to be an advocate. I found the decisionmaking process, while there was different, enormously challenging, enormously satisfying. While i like being u. S. Attorney i had to say i love being a judge because the opportunity to resolve disputes, large and small, that all matter to somebody, some of them have large public significance, and thats a very satisfying role. Its interesting that in secret we also have the task of running a trial and trying to convey a sense of order and fairness to a courtroom. Its got jurors, witnesses, lawyers running around. Its a busy place. The court of appeals is required. Required. And just two other colleagues. Very different. But both roles are extremely satisfying, very worthwhile and im so privileged to have the chance and still have the chance to do it. Host you make a point about your prosecutorial days, and you just made it again, that the decision to prosecute is not only the most sometimes difficult but also consequential, which i found as well. Maybe you can talk about why charging someone with a crime, even if they are eventually acquitted, is a consequential decision. Guest if you charge someone, first place in the federal system, charges are brought generally where theres a very strong case. Host proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Guest in order to convict. But to start the case and, federal prosecutors generally only go forward with cases that are quite strongly they have resources of fbi and other agencies. That helps. But occasionally there could be case with a come to you, the fbi comes to you in the federal system and asks permission, as you know, thats not the way the state system works. The federal system needs the permission of a federal prosecutor, unless they see the current happening on the street. So if you go ahead, the chances are there will be a conviction. Every once in a while you see a case and you say, this doesnt look so good to me. You say to the agent can go back and check some other things. I had one very interesting case where they came and brought the case where there was an accusation of rape. I wont go into all the details. Takes too long to tell if its in the book. Its a good story, but the accuser wouldve been believed by a jury in an instance. Very respectable person. The accuser was this little tiny rent of the guy. Nobody would have believed him at all. But the agent was suspicious. I was suspicious. We gave them both lie detector test. He passed, she flunked. We investigated and we found a thirdparty witness in a bar who could corroborate exactly what he said and blew a hole in what she sai