Transcripts For CSPAN3 Supreme Court Food Traditions 2016081

Posing or being created in American Government, and this fits again with your position, victoria. They were worried that extreme on what would be called the right and extreme on the left would actually cause turmoil that would break down American Government, that the only way to solve the problems of American Government was to find some middle reform, some middlelevel reform. Now, i appreciate very much randy mentioning my book, and along with david bernsteins book, too, which i think is a very good book, but i have two things to pitch for myself about that. I think if youre going to read those two books, youd ought to review my review of bernstein, because its a bit unfair. He wrote his book about 20 years after mine, so i had a shot back at him in a review. The other thing, if you were really interested in that subject, i ought to tell you that the book that youll see in the gift store is not its part of a series that doesnt allow footnotes. But i also wrote that book as a hardback book and all the foot notes are in the hardback book, if you want to trace my research. Okay. Thanks a lot. Okay. Is there anything else youd like to say, professor burnett . Were going over a little bit. Is this our closing . This is our closing. Okay, all right. Does paul get another closing, or that was his closing . I dont know. Lets close with you. Okay, great. Well, thanks very much again. Theres lots of mythology about the Lochner Court. We didnt get into, for example, the mythology that comes about as a result of justice holm invocation of the social status saying the law does not enact herberts social status, and then many have associate ad this with a condemnation of social darwinism, it is said, when, in fact, spencer was not a social darwinist of any kind. He did believe in evolution, but he didnt believe in social darwinism. And social status was really a famous book that argued for what was called the law of equal freedom. That is, everybody should be free to do what they will, provided that their freedom does not infringe opinion the like freedoms, the equal freedoms of other people. And i brought along my copy of social statics here so you can see it. Its a very good book. It has a whole chapter, by the way, on the rights of children and of women. Spencer was way ahead of his time when it came to advocating for those sorts of rights. But the idea of the law of equal freedom inherently brings up the subject of reasonable regulation. Because in fact, if everybody should be free to do whatever they look so long as their freedom does not impenned upon the like freedom of other people, that immediately calls for the regulation of liberty in some way, shape and form. In fact, as a contracts professor, the entire body of contract law is a regulation on the making of contracts. It says what constitutes a contract, when can they be made, when can they be enforced, what our defense is to them. There is an entire regulation of contracts that goes back many, many years, centuries, per happens. Its something that libertarians do not object to. The issue is not whether you can regulate liberty, but whether the regulation is reasonable, and thats not an easy question to answer. And maybe the Lochner Court answered it wrongly. I dont think they did, but maybe they did. But i dont think the question they were asking was the wrong question to ask. And i think we would be better off if instead of trying to rely on judges to identify which liberties that we have are fundamental, and they get super duper protection, and the liberties the judges dont think are fundamental get no protection at all, we could do a lot worse than following the prenew deal approach to the police powers, which is simply to say, of course liberty may be regulated republicanably for the common good, but now you need to come up with a theory of what that means. And then you need to hold legislatures within their proper powers. The declaration of independence says that were each endowed with unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and it is to secure these rights, it is to secure these rights that governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers not all power, not unlimited power, but their just powers from the consent of the governed. And thats what the lochner case is about, what is the just scope of the power that the government has to regulate our liberties so as to protect the equal liberties of each and every one of us. Thank you. Thank you both for a wonderful discussion. I want to say thank you. That was great. And its professor nourse. My father worked in the nourse auditorium for years in the San Francisco school department, so naturally, i mispronounced your name. But that was fabulous. Thank you very much. American history tv airs on cspan every weekend. This month American History tv is in prime time to introduce you to programs you could see every weekend on cspan 3. Lectures and history, visits to College Classrooms across the country, american artifacts takes a look at the treasures of u. S. Historic sites and ar chooifs, real america revealing the 20th century through newsreels, the civil war where you hear about the people who shaped the civil war and the presidency focuses on u. S. President s and fist ladies. To learn about their politics, policies and legacies. All this month on American History tv on cspan 3. Tomorrow night on American History tv prime time, the holocau holocaust. Three conversations from the holocaust museums. It begans at 8 eastern with sur visor recalling her experiences. At 9 pn 05 Louis Lawrence talks about surviving the holocaust in the netherlands. And at 10 00 eastern, growing up in palestine in the 1930s and 40s. At cspan. Org you can watch any time at your political convenience, on your desktop, laptop or mobile app. Go to cspan. Org. Here you can type in the name of a speaker, sponsor or bill. Review the list and click on the program youd like to watch. Or refine your search. If youre looking for the most current programs, our home page has many current programs ready for your immediate viewing, such as todays washington journal or the events we covered that day. Cspan. Org is a public service, so if youre a cspan watcher, check it out at cspan. Org. Coming up, the supreme course food preferences and topics of conversations at shared meals. And customs dated from 19th and 20th centuries. This took place at the National Museum of history here in washington and it is just over an hour. So, its absolutely a thrill to see so many people here for this kind of a program. My name is john gray, and i have the wonderful privilege of being the director of your National Museum of American History, particularly on nights like tonight in which we really take a look at American History in unique and unusual ways. We are really honored to be joined by Tonights Panel, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader ginsburg, Supreme Court Justice Sonia sotomayor. [ applause ] katherine fitz. [ applause ] and Supreme Court Society Publications director clair cushman. [ applause ] it is now my privilege to introduce the 13th secretary of the smithsonian institution, dr. David scoudon, a boardcertified cardiologist, a jazz musician, and he was most recently the president of Cornell University and previously served as president of the university of iowa. Dr. Scourton has interests in learning as wide as the smithsonian. And most importantly tonight, hes a pescataria. Thanks, john, for the introduction. And thank you on behalf of the American People for the great job you do. So innovative and creative at this amazing museum. [ applause ] especially in such an interesting election year, we all appreciate everything you and your colleagues are doing to share so many aspects of the story of america and to aspire us all with that story. Esteemed colleagues and friends, welcome to this unique opportunity, a word i dont use lightly, to find out more about the highest court in the land and how its members have worked and dined together. The Supreme Court and the smithsonian have long had close ties. Since the 19th century, the chief justice has served as the chancellor of the smithsonian board of regents. I am indebted to chief john roberts for his work in this capacity and for the guidance that he has provided me in my transition, my first year at the smithsonian, and the education about the smithsonian and for his ongoing leadership. Justice sotomayor and Justice Ginsburg, i thank you and your colleagues on the court for your crucial work that underpins our democracy. Thank you. [ applause ] i know i speak for everyone by saying you are pioneers and role models and exemplars of the nuanced and principled thinking that undergirds the american rule of law, and i am glad to say friends of the smithsonian. Justice ginsburg and Justice Sotomayor have each shared their fascinating stories with us as part of our Smithsonian Associates program, and they are both represented in the National Portrait gallery on Nelson Shanks painting four justices, which also features Justice Kagan and former justice objection connor. I invite you, if you havent, to see it on display at the portrait gallery through october. The National Postal museum has stamps that feature legal giants like Justice William brennan, Louis Brandeis, and this very museum has in its collection the robe Sandra Day Oconnor wore as she was sworn in as the first woman justice on the Supreme Court. The seismic shifts in our nations history have typically been characterized in part by struggle. The politics have frequently been hotly contested, but as this years contentious president ial election unfolds, its good to remember that politics can end at the edge of a plate. This is because food brings us all together. It is communal. It is ritual. Food has always bound civilization, as is evident in a centuriesold phrase and tradition of breaking bread. One of my favorite variations of this term is its hard to remain enemies when youve broken bread together. Nothing exemplifies that sentiment more than the close relationship shared by Justice Ginsburg and the late justice antonin scalia. The picture of the two of them on top of an elephant on a trip to india for me was worth many thousands of words. These brilliant colleagues put any differences aside, whether traveling the world or simply breaking bread together here. Convening people to explore our shared humanity and a measure of shared wisdom is what the smithsonian is all about. From discussions of current topics to Educational Programs to events like this one that examine our common bonds, the smithsonian is at heart a place where people can come together. Thank you for gathering so that we can hear some fascinating stories and partake of some food for thought. John . [ applause ] thank you very much, secretary skorton, and thank you to our partners at the Supreme Court Historical Society for their support of this program. We also welcome the staff of the Supreme Court and the offices of justices ginsburg and sotomayor and many other distinguished guests. Tonight we are really honored to be joined by two members of the nations highest court, and they have come together to talk about food. In fact, this is one of those rare and special times when the justices will speak publicly on topics outside the law. We are the home of julia childs kitchen and so many other National Treasures related to food and its consumption and its production, and we do so for a reason. We make the intimate link between food and our history, and in doing so, we help our nation understand the past in order to make sense of the present and shape a more humane future. Food history, food stories and our own love of food awaken vivid memories that create an awareness and an empathy for all. With that, just a few ground rules. First, please limit your photography to the first two minutes of the discussion after i leave the stage. Please remember to turn off your cell phones. It is now our honor to introduce Tonights Panel on the fascinating, delicious topic, the importance of food at the Supreme Court. Please join me in welcoming our distinguished panel, Justice Ruth Bader ginsburg joined the Supreme Court in 1993. Previously, as part of an extensive and distinguished legal career, she was appointed to the u. S. Court of appeals for the District Of Columbia circuit. Justice ginsburg attended Harvard Law School and received her llb from Columbia Law School and served on the law review at both schools. Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined the Supreme Court in 2009. Previously, as part of an extensive and distinguished legal career, she served on the u. S. Court of appeals for the 2nd district on the u. S. District court, Southern District of new york. Justice sotomayor earned a jd from yale law school, where she served as editor of the yale law journal. Katherine fitts is curator of the u. S. Supreme court and tonights moderator, clair cushman, is the director of publications at the Supreme Court Historical Society and author of a number of books on the history of the court. Thank you all for joining us at our table, and we look forward to this discussion. Thank you. Thank you for that introduction. On behalf of the Supreme Court Historical Society, id like to thank the smithsonian for partnering with us for this event, for hosting us in this beautiful room, and especially to its staff for organizing it. On a cold, february night in 1790, the justices met and held their first session of the Supreme Court in new york city. After they adjourned, they went to a tavern in Lower Manhattan and ate dinner. They dined with new York District judges, the attorney general, and had a really good time. They made 13 toasts, including one to the president , one to the constitution, and one to the new national judiciary. So, since its very inception, the Supreme Courts justices have found ways to come together and share meals. As theyre appointed for life, they often sit on the bench together for years, if not decades, and they look for ways to enhance cordiality and cooperation by, as you said, breaking bread together. Tonight were going to examine the evolution of some of the courts customs involving food from the early 19th century and then hear about what some of these distinguished justices have to say about current practices. Lets start with the Marshall Court era when john marshal of virginia presided over the court from 1801 to 1835. He sat on the court. There were six and then seven justices, and they were appointed from all up and down the eastern seaboard, from boston all the way down to georgia and then eventually out west to kentucky. They came to washington to the Supreme Court sessions alone. They left their wives and their children in their home towns. They didnt move their families to washington. Because the court term was very short. During the Marshall Court era, it was usually about two months long. Accordingly, chief Justice John Marshall arranged for them all to live together in a boarding house, and they took almost all their meals together. So, katherine, why did John Marshall want the justices to live, dine, work and socialize together . Well, i would say that i think the primary reason was that he wanted to build the bonds between the justices. I think it also goes to say that the court started off with a very nomadic existence. They were in new york when that was the seat of the nations government. Then they moved to philadelphia, and then they came to washington. And i think also at the time, we have to remember that in washington, it wasnt the city, of course, that we know today, and so there were very few places for the justices and members of congress who would also come kind of on this transient schedule to washington. So they lived in the boarding houses to kind of gain that fraternal bond and to also come together. And i think John Marshall also wanted the justices to kind of learn to c