You know, if you spend your life in the i, i need, i want, i think, i feel, that becomes pretty boring and very limiting because your sense of self is only fed by you and thats limited by you. And by that i mean you can only give so much to yourself because you need to feed yourself in positive ways to be able to create and give back in more meaningful ways. So i understood that from Public Service mostly when i got to college, where i began to do a little bit of it and realized that each experience gave me so much more in return than i gave it, because it taught me about people, about their needs, about the structure of society. Some of its weaknesses in helping people. In one of the First Community projects i got involved in in college, it came as a result of reading in the local newspaper that a gentleman had been coming from puerto rico and the plane had been diverted from a new york airport to newark. While at newark, when it landed, he became a little bit upset because he didnt understand what was happening around him. Today we think of the u. S. As being filled with bilingual people, but remember, were talking about the 1970s where there was a sizeable hispanic population, but it was not as sizeable as it is today. And bilingualism wasnt as welcomed the back then as now. Anyway, in his agitation he became a little bit unruly, and the Police Stepped in and took him to trenton psychiatric hospital. It took weeks for someone who understood spanish to interview him and to determine that he wasnt crazy, but that what had happened and reach out to his family before he was released. That story shook me. The idea that a group of patients in a hospital had no one to talk to in their own language really bothered me. And so i went to the Latino Community on princetons campus and i asked them whether they would join me in volunteering there once a week. We would take turns. And just go to talk to the people there. We had holiday parties. We had gettogethers. We played games with them, for those who could participate, obviously. And we just provided companionship. It wasnt as if we were treating them. We didnt have any capacity to do that. But that experience actually made me feel better about, not myself, but better about understanding the world and trying to change it a step at a time. A lot of people think that the only change you can do thats meaningful is change that i do in the position i hold. Its pretty impressive sometimes when i get to write a really great opinion or when im in the majority in a really great opinion. [laughter] when im in the dissent, its a little disappointing, but even then ive been a voice in the conversation. Those big things impress a lot of people, but theyre not the things that matter to most people. Its those little things. Its the human companionship. Its the trying to make the community you live in a little bit better, a little bit happier. So thats what i think Public Service is. Its the kind of Public Service that says to people, you dont have to be a politician. You can work in almost any endeavor you want and make a difference in peoples lives by just giving some time and some effort to that enterprise. Judge katzmann mentioned dean treanor earlier. You know that dean treanor here and as he did in his prior deanship has always believed that the law should have some practical effect and that students who are in law school should be working in that area so that its not always theoretical. You can remain theoretical. And, boy, do i do that a lot. Ok . Thats what a lot of my job is about. But the other part of it is being a human being and giving in those small circles around you. Im going to follow up on that so hence, my first day of meeting the people in the cafeteria. Right. So im going to ask you now a little bit about your day job but also in sort of the context of the previous two judicial day jobs you held. I think when president obama think he said well, you had i think when president obama nominated you, i think he said well, you had 17, i think, years of judicial service, which i think he said was more than any other justice had had in the past 100 years. Thats a lot of experience. So you are sort of uniquely qualified to talk a little bit about the differences in the kinds of work youve done at each of those levels. Maybe for the students here you could just talk a little bit about your role as a District Court judge, role as a Circuit Court judge, and how those things contrast or compare with your current job. And maybe if theres anything you miss about your work on the other two courts that would be interesting to hear also. We know you miss new york. Horribly. The Supreme Court would be perfect if i could cut it out and put it in lower manhattan. [laughter] some people are clapping. I actually miss all of my two prior jobs because each was very different and important in meaningful ways. Quoting a colleague, rina rodgey, who once said work a District Court is controlled chaos, but chaos nevertheless. Ok . The pace of a District Court judges life is nonstop. You are running from, every day, 200 and whatever days a year you work, if not more, from one judicial activity to another. Youre having hearings, but youre having multitude of different kinds of hearings, whether theyre suppression hearings, discovery hearings, plea hearings. I could keep naming them. Theres a wide variety of types of interactions that youre having with lawyers and different kinds of legal situations that youre dealing with. This is on top of sitting in on trials where a wide variety of procedures take place that are each different in and of themselves picking the jury, working with lawyers on opening statements, the presentation of evidence, the preparation of charges afterwards so that can you tell the jury what its supposed to do, and then supervising the jurys deliberations. All of these things are constantly taking you from one point to another. At the end of one activity to another, all day long, at the end of my first year i once said, i now know why the brain is a muscle. This job has showed me how much it can stretch. There was so much new information my first year on the bench that i was absorbing that i didnt have a headache, i had a head that ached. Theres a big difference. That was what continued for my five years on the bench on the District Court. You do get to interact with the lawyers in the courtroom. You get to see a lot of human nature in terms of witnesses and what theyre talking about. But the job of a District Court judge is to develop a record, to get the evidence out, and then to rule on it. And ive often described their job as doing justice in the individual case. Theyve got two parties. They have to resolve that dispute according to the law. And so theyre worried basically their attention is focused on these two people who sit before them. You get on an Appellate Court and youre no longer the master of your courtroom. You now have to share responsibility with three people. And things that were routine as a District Court judge now become a conference. The first day that i had to confer with my colleagues about giving an extension on the number of pages that somebodys brief had to be, i thought to myself im going to hate this job. It seemed like such a silly waste of time. Ok . It was a silly waste of time, but not institutionally. Because that collaborative Decision Making is what appellate work is about. Its sharing the responsibility of thinking through whether a lower court has made an error of law. And that is a process that takes some of the burden out of judging. Because when you can share your thinking and your analysis with two other people and when you can work at convincing them that either youre right or theyre wrong or however you want to approach it, or them convincing you its a very satisfying job. But what Circuit Court judges are doing is more deciding justice for the law. You see, Circuit Courts are announcing what the law is for that circuit. Theres 13 circuits in the United States. A number of states are divided up among the circuits. Mine was three states. But the 9th circuit out in california has nine states. And some three i think is the minimum, if im remembering correctly. But some have four or five or six. The circuits were divided according to their historical entry into the union. So the Second Circuit was actually the mother court. We take pride in claiming that we were the first court, the First Circuit got started right after us, maybe on the same day, but we still call ourselves the mother court. At any rate, what youre trying to do is find the legal errors in the decision below. And in doing that youre trying to determine what you believe the law is as dictated by precedent. So what happens when you get on the Supreme Court . If you didnt think you were master of the courtroom when you had three people, when you have nine, youre nothing, alone, because you have to decide something with at least a majority, with five people. And convincing five very independent, sometimes hardheaded myself included people is not an easy not an easy task. But what youre doing on a Supreme Court is announcing what the law says in a case where precedent doesnt necessarily control. By definition, the Supreme Court generally only takes, with few exceptions, only takes cases when theres a circuit split. What that means is that circuits below among the 13 have disagreed as to what the answer is under the law. Assuming, as i think you should, that most judges, and certainly in panels of three, are trying to do whats right under the law, the fact that theyve disagreed means that theres no clear answer. And what youre asking the Supreme Court to do is to provide that clarity. But that also means that the responsibility on us is enormous because our decisions generally involve matters that affect not the law of your circuit alone, but the law of the country and sometimes of the world. And so the Supreme Court is really the Court Operating where there is no clear answer in virtually every one of their cases. There is a real problem relying on the news to tell you what Supreme Court cases say. And i know we make it a little bit hard because when you pick up our opinions, they tend to be long and they often have a lot of jargon. I encourage you, however, not to rely on the news as citizens. Read the opinions. When you do, and if you actually read them with an open mind, youll often come out saying they both seem right. How can that be . Well, that can be because the law is unclear, because precedents dont really settle that question. And you have to believe, the way i do, that this group of nine are each passionate about trying to find the right answer. And even though we disagree as to what that answer may be or may not be, we all are filled with the same passion. Thats how i can stand being, sometimes, on the losing end of a case. A more personal question about your day job before i turn to the student questions. What has surprised you about the day job, working with the nine or the kinds of cases that you get . Maybe well leave it at that. What surprised you . And five years in, are you doing Something Different now than you did when you started . Worrying more. Seriously. After youre a judge for 17 years, you dont take your responsibilities lightly, but you do understand that youre not the final word, that there are courts ahead of you. If youre on the District Court, theres an Appellate Court. If youre on the Appellate Court, you know theres a Supreme Court. So on those unclear cases theres a lot of comfort from knowing that youre not the final word, that if youre wrong, someone can fix it. When youre on that last, final court, you recognize that if you get it wrong you are really affecting peoples lives, if not forever, for a very, very long time. It takes a long time for congress, if it can at all, to change any statutory decisions we make that they think are wrong. And obviously if were wrong on our interpretation of what the constitution means, then it takes even longer to undo that if at all. And so the burden of this job and how much i feel it came as an enormous surprise to me. Its not a bad one, but i have more restless nights. In a way that i hope will not give you more restless nights, i have some student questions. So im going to turn to them now having been instructed that now is the moment to do so. Ok. I dont know who pointed that out. Whoever asks the question, would you please get up . If youre up there, with the lights, i can barely see up there, just say, im here or Something Like that. At one place i said, say yo. [laughter] i just like knowing whos asking the question. So i dont want to embarrass you, but please do stand up. So the first question is from maria mendoza. Hi. Hello. Now i feel silly reading her question since shes there. But i will continue on as instructed. Hello. Her question was, whats the one piece of advice you would tell your younger self as a female . And thats underlined. Not to lack confidence so much. I was afraid an awful lot. As i have lived to almost get to the age that i am if im saying it, its because its surprising me. And my friends know this. Im about to turn 60, and im shocked. Ok . [applause] its really a little disturbing. But the problem is that inside myself, the image i have of me is still that 9yearold kid with the curls running down that street in puerto rico i end my book with. Ok . Thats the image i still have of myself and the idea of having grown to what they say is the new middle age is shocking. Ok . But in this ive had a lot of opportunity to talk to a lot of women of all ages, older and younger. And i know that for many of us, and its still a problem, we dont come to our lives with the same selfconfidence that sometimes men do. And i think part of that may be because of societal gender treatment differences. But whatever the causes are, i think women are more afraid of taking chances. If i could talk to the younger sonia, i would spend a lot less time in that state of constant fear, include doing this job. Eloise can talk about it. I spent my first year petrified. It takes zaps a lot of energy out of you. And i still have moments of it and probably will forever. And i wish i could change that. As i said, embarrassment or the fear of embarrassment holds you back. And the lack of confidence may not hold you back but it certainly burdens you unnecessarily. Heres the question from josh. Josh, where are you . Ah, hello. Thank you for being here. Thank you. Thank you all for coming. I know ive taken you some of you or a lot of you from classes. So thanks. Ill, again, read joshs question. With a career in the law, particularly one which involves so much time on the bench, have you found it appropriate to set goals or are you wary of having an agenda . Oh, im assuming from the question that youre talking about professional goals or goals as a justice. Josh . Hes shaking his head yes. I dont know if im afraid of having an agenda. I dont think that thats what motivates me against having goals. I think what motivates me is understanding that its not within my control, meaning we respond to cases as they come to us, and it does happen that a lot of those cases are important but when they come and how they come, in what factual setting, is not within our control. And neither is are you going to have colleagues who are going to agree with you. And i think if youre a sensible person, you understand that although you might have confidence in what you think your vision is and what the law should be, you might be wrong. And you should take pause when people are disagreeing with you to think through carefully their side of things. Now, that doesnt mean that principle wont lead you to still disagree. Ive had already my fair share of single dissents, but i do them because i think theres an important reason to do it. But my point is that i dont think i do it from fear of setting an agenda, but more from the recognition that my agenda may not be the best. Thats really dangerous to think that youave all the answers. So i do try very hard to grow with my job, to teach to deal with each case on its own terms, and to understand each side of the arguments being presented so that i can render a decision based on that set of facts, that issue, and not my idea of whats right or wrong. The most dangerous thing in judging is playing god. That to me is the most dangerous thing. Here is a question from bibi. Hi. [inaudible] thank you. Again, ill read her question. I follow direction. Which aspects of your childhood have been most salient in your legal career . You know something . I dont think that theres one salient aspect of anything you do in life that should take over who you are in your work or in your personal life. The person we become is a mesh of a whole bunch of different experiences. Who i am as a judge is not sonia from the bronx. Ok . It is being a prosecutor. Its become a civil litigator. Its being a trial judge. Its being a court of appeals judge. It is all of those things that i learned about, about our society, about how it functions, about our place in it. And all of that influences my career and has influenced my career. I think, and i hope you may have gone through my book. But if you didnt and you read it, i wrote it so that people would take my life journey with me, to understand how each stage of my life what new understandings it gave me and to, i hope, evoke in people as they read it reflections upon what they learned from each part of their life. I talk in the book i start the book with describing when i was diagnosed with juvenile diabetes and the discipline and determination that it taught me. And that condition will be with me my entire life. It has been and will be. And that discipline and that determination have been with me and will be. But so has every other experienc