And he said was that when i was at harvard law school, i had a teacher who change my life. Martha. Martha minow. It is a delight to be here and i learned so much from you through the years so thank you for doing that. I couldnt pass this opportunity up. Love the book because it has your compassionate and brilliant, and is wise and it is grounded and provocative. How did you come to this legendary career but excess to the highest cause of legal power to writing a book about forgiveness. I read a book about 20 years ago about responses to mass violence. And at that time, my Conciliation Commission in south africa had just started. I was so intrigued by the development of new Legal Institution to deal with really horrific violence and oppression. And i read the book and i called it between engines and forgiveness and finding an alternative to two different responses to horrific acts. Enter since time have people suddenly, why between. Why cant it just forget. And it exit me. So that what led me to write this book. The law does forgive at times. See talk about some examples about how rhino, the law can be forgiving. It may seem surprising since particularly one of those fundamental quote commitments place western law that has rol roles, and whatever forgiveness is, thats not what it is. But actually, whether it is bankruptcy rules that allow the forgiveness of debt for the heart and power given to the president of the United States and the governors, we have explicit devices some that are less woa known in the criminal field. You are an expert. Expungement of records and sealing of records but even that discretion the prosecutor has not to go forward is the kind of forgiveness. I was fascinated by all of this. I want to talk about each one of them. And the idea of bankruptcy is the kind of forgiveness. I know we have the word forgiveness. You almost invested the redemptive quality. A transformative holiday. I found it so rich and provocative. I want to start by achy about limits to forgiveness. You see some things they seem unforgivable. Are they. Maybe it helps by start defining forgiveness. I defined it as loving go of justified agreements. So dont say or even in the land of forgiveness if we are talking about charges or disputes where there isnt a justified claim. If we are dealing with justified forgiveness, i guess i do say that we need to acknowledge that law is imperfect and people are imperfect and at times loving go of the innate even a justified claim is better for everybody. It is better for the society and the interpersonal context it is often much better even for the ones who have been harmed, not to carry the grass around. And for the legal system, what we are not dealing with emotions much but we are dealing with who made this now. Mass incarceration. We have swarmed the Justice System. So far, nearly makes me say about the time for a recess. About mass incarceration. But there are situations where vengeance seems only appropriate. In an 2015, mother emanuel, and south carolina, amending dylan was welcomed into a person from. Does the whole world knows, is the white supremacist tears. Her name murdered my people. Some of his family members talked about forgiveness. As we feel about that. I do have kind of in astonishment. I did at the time when family members at the arraignment and at the sentencing hearing said that they forgave dylan. Nothing i can imagine doing and its not that i say that that law or any of the persons should expect anyone, i say are particularly worried aspects where there is a racial or gender expectation about the supposed to be forgiven. But i do say that those individuals were acting out of a religious playpen for them, it was the right thing to do. In my own analysis, their interpersonal forgiveness has nothing to do with what the law should do. In this instance were dylan committed an absolutely inexcusable act in a hateful act and has never shown contrition to the contrary. He has been boastful and proud about what he did. There is no place for forgiveness in the legal system because he is violated the trust of everyone. But there is a sense sometimes that we expect africanamerican people or women or lgbt people to be forgiving when we are confronted with justifiable defenses. It might be different from white folks for heterosexual people or men. I say its completely true. And for the same reason in the same statement coming out of the mouth of somebody would be viewed as angry or just a proportionate when is someone who has occupied a position of power in society than someone who has brought. So i say we need to be vigilant about that and tick concerned about that. And at the same time, i admire when brett john, the 18 yearold brother of the murder victim killed by amber geiger, White Female Police officer in dallas when 18 yearold brother said after the sentencing, i forgive you. That is something to admire that comes out of his religious beliefs but there should be no lesser sentence of man view for the conduct. On the case, when the judge stepped down from her bench and hugged amber whos just been convicted of murder. As sentenced to ten years in prison. The judge said that she hugged amber because she asked her to. I was more troubled by that. And the judge has a position as an officer of the law, she didnt do anything wrong and says that the trial was over and sentencing was over but still she was wearing her robe and whatever her personal feelings were, i guess i say that they belong outside of the courtroom. Still thats in your mind, not a paradigm example of the kind of a forgiveness the law should exercise. No. Again that seems to be about the interpersonal relationships where what i am interested in is what law itself, with the exercise of charges or exacting sanction, when that seems even though it is warranted, it seems like okay, there are good reasons now planning out. And bankruptcy is the really good example. Assume a mistake them in order. See start by looking at the adult children. Two different sets of kids. Children who have been forced to fight in wars often overseas or exploited in other ways. And you also say about children mainly in the United States to get charged and are guilty of serious offenses. How should forgiveness work in that context. One of the methods that we lawyers use as a comparison. Its always been striking to me that because i do work in International Human rights to see out child soldiers are discussed and treated in international law. And there are people who opt affected or coerced but there also people who volunteer to join armed conflict. In many commit terrible acts. Murder and rape the recruit other children. And theres the question, is it the conflict ends, what to do. While in the international context, the approach taken by the law is that those most responsible should be punished. The adult who recruited them should be punished. And the International Criminal courts has no authority to go after people who joined the conference when they were children. And instead, internationally, theres been a trend towards talking about reconciliation and rehabilitation services. I trust that with the treatment of across this country of young people drone into conflict with the brent is directly related or gangrelated and we have the opposite here we have a punitive and a way of talking about predators as if they are in no context. No acknowledgment of the adult who created the world in which air drone into and the best option plans to be the drug trade. The schools are not offering a real opportunity etc. Etc. Citizens talk about the adults are responsible. And says despite the origins of the Juvenile Court is the place that was supposed to be more forgiving and more rehabilitative, we have made it a place that these young people just like adults, either automatically transferring them to adult court or levying kinds of sanctions for conduct that no other country in the world does. So i say we could learn from the example. I say both context, coming up with an alternative like like a Truth Commission where the young people of chance to account for what they did and had met it and to talk about it and to grieve themselves maybe find a path to forgive themselves. I also than to reinvest in them so that they have a chance to join society and being constructive participants. But we do say about the legal response to children should be forgiveness doesnt mean that they shouldnt be held accountable. Absolutely right. Indeed i say we are talking with former child soldiers and gang members. They are the first ones to blame themselves know they did something wrong. And indeed there are some instances where young people are not held responsible and they feel adrift. Set actually have the chance to see, yes they work norms, i violated them an analysis of forward, would we do. How to make amends. We do talk about child soldiers coming mentioned that some children are coerced into going into that kind of terrorism. In other children do it voluntarily. Should the law treat those two sets of children differently. Will certainly that that law should tends to treat very differently. I say that continuing though of coercion to voluntariness is more maybe even with children who are present for all of us. When we see that someone volunteers again on what circumstances and who what choices. So understanding the context matters a lot and in my view, actually is more relevant is whether the people acknowledge they did something wrong and want to make amends. Im very affected by violence. Even the comment the great civil rights lawyer criminal just her lawyer and professor says no one should be judged by the worst mama and their lives. And i say theres more of a sympathy that spirit when we say about young people who have decades ahead of them. We should tap into that. In criminal law, we talk about deterrent. Its the idea that with some causes harm should be consequences. In one of the purposes of this consequences is for everyone else to learn. If you make a mistake, if you commit a crime you will be punished. And the idea is that sops of the people from committing those crimes. So in the context of children since they are more vulnerable and more exploitable, if they are not consequences, are you concerned about the torrance. I am and im concerned about education generally. They are pretty good studies that show that keeping larger and larger sentences, dont actually deter young people for participating in criminal activity. And it may be that actually thinking longterm has brought actually the strong suits that a lot of adolescents. So the response of that the law should take to deterrent is to note that who the people are and what it takes to educate them. And of course we talk about specific deterrence to that individual as well as general deterrence of the other people can learn from it. And again i say showing that there is a path, forward, has brought going to undermine the recognition that it is shameful to have violated the norms. A lot of our understanding about children making a mistake is informed by science. This includes research and you talk about that children brains take those long time to develop. In fact now not wholly developed until it they are around 25. Geiser min, raines male brains take longer than female brains. The 25. S ames, okay you are getting up there and at the same time, in response of this evidence, there are some cords that are thinking about dealing with folks who commit crimes including updates from older folks. And he feel about that. I say it is about time that bob took greater note of the developments in neuroscience. Certainly it was that kind of evidence that affected the Supreme Court in the decision about life that went out parole for juveniles. And i say that it is also relevant to what schools do and can do. So increasing numbers of high schools in the United States had shifted their disciplinary process to one that is participatory with the other peers who actually can arrange for what is called Restorative Justice processes and they can make in an educational experience for everybody. For those who have internet another actually have to be accountable. But also come up with a plan about what theyre going to do and hear with the impact of their actions are on others. And its folded into the educational experience. That takes account of the science of the social science of the developmental stages that the young people are at. My mom is the former secondgrade teacher. She retired from teaching almost 25 years in Chicago Public schools. She can be hard on kids. I find this true of a lot of teachers and especially elementary and high school. And in some ways, i say they develop Higher Expectations of them. But another part is just about rules. So in the criminal law, one idea is that the purpose of criminal law is to impose just a minimum set of standards that everybody has to follow. We dont care who you are. Some minimally. Dont kill. Bill sexually assault, dont steal, and there the ideas that are basic. That is part of your responsibility as a citizen. And if you dont, obey the minimal standards then you should be punished. There are consequences. As should be consequences. In the law i say, every society has come up rules of that nature. And it should be consequences that are known by everyone. And that are applied fairly and evenly. In the not always applied fairly and evenly. I say that the disregard and trust of the legal system is another factor. That is to be taken into serious accounts. A teacher whose stuff like your mother, is usually very well regarded by the students because they have high expectations. And theyre expressing a belief in the capacity of the young people to actually live up to those rules. A legal system that is inconsistent, doesnt earn that kind of trust. And weak we dont have people trust in their Legal Systems it cant operator. The place to get the information that they need. And they dont the help from the community about who actually was to blame. And so in part, this call for forgiveness in the law on my part, so way to see that is one way that we as human beings are entrusted with one another. You mentioned inconsistency in law. Your book suggests that in some ways, we do talk about forgiveness of children who have committed crimes, that is a harder case to make. Seems unfamiliar but as you talk about forgiveness of debt. People, say about that in the law treat that forgiveness differently. We use the word forgiveness, so when we talk about debt. When we go back in history, there was a similar moral view about failing to pay a creditor. We have about violating a criminal norm. And while there is better presence. Absolutely. Ultimately ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court off of we have new forms of better presence now when people cannot pay and finds and posed by the legal system itself. I say over time we have seen the United States, a fascinating evolution when it comes to bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is actually present in the United States constitution. Sue acrylate. The congress is given power to the constitution to have and make her see law and this is in no small way traceable to Thomas Jefferson who was himself in debt much of his life. And he also because he was Thomas Jefferson developed a kind of political theory about it in his view is one generation should not burn in the next with a debt. In the creation of a National Bankruptcy law has in many people feel kind of been associated in the United States with our tradition of entrepreneurship and Second Chances for people to start a business and it doesnt work. Life course have business bankruptcy and we also have personal bankruptcy and there is the same possibility for individuals to start over. And there are consequences. Of course there are four any excess that people have, has to be made available to help pay off the debts. There also is the loss of Credit Ratings that people may take ten years, Companies May take those long time to rebuild the kata rating and it will all be charged by the interest the next and they are borrowing but what we do this we allow people to turn the page and start over. Rather than be so varied by debt that they can never get out of it. And yes, i do say that there is a reason that the United States has a tradition of innovation and risktaking that the entity of many parts of the world. Bankruptcy thought is part of that. Customizing the idea that bankruptcy and for forgiveness of debt is part of why the United States is the leader in technology. Interesting idea, you talk about recent legislation and bankruptcy bankruptcy legislation that exempts. Hears us inconsistency problem. Treating, loads differently than others same to me to undermine basic fairness. In here to put maybe and underline the problem, when we have a situation right now, we have forprofit schools that have sales because they have not delivered a quality education. Schools themselves can declare bankruptcy. But the young people who took up long, they cannot. And that seems really unfair in my mind. The nature of the exemptions is the political process. Those who were able to get the Student Loans exempted, that is relatively recent and american Bankruptcy Law and we can change it and i say we should change it and there have been programs and administrative programs to allow for Debt Forgiveness for young people in the Current Administration is cutting back on this programs. Seems counterproductive. We should be investing in young people. When people see the students knew what they were signing up for, if better pay. Life is tough. I would rather not pay my mortgage but i know ive got to pay it. Led to believe there are rules for a reason. But often times in his work bankruptcy does so woa, that participation in the problem is more than one person. So the people who gave these loans, actually contributed to the problems. And the people you said the