are we good? grade. good evening, everyone. i'm the treasurer of the supreme court historical society. i actually stayed in this room with some frequency but i'm usually faced in that direction so it's a nice change of pace to be looking out there. i am asked to remind everyone please turn off all cell phones, tablets, apple watches even if they are in silent mode they can cause interference with the sound system so appreciate your assistance. this has been a long time coming. we began in 1991 with justice kennedy talking about the court packing plant and then the privilege of doing it again in 2018 to celebrate justice marshall's 50th anniversary on

the court, so it's fitting that we are here once again after the pandemic. it's nice to be back in the courtroom for the 70th anniversary. at the white house historical association into the u.s. capital society and we appreciate very much our partnership in that end ever. i'd like to express the societies gratitude this evening to justice ketanji brown jackson. this is the first event we had the privilege of having her participate with the society and she's doing double duty tonight. first she will be a host and also participant. after the judge speaks, she will join in conversation to discuss. as i suspect you all know it is a pretty time for the justices of the court, so we thank her for taking the time away from her many duties and we are honored by her presence.

it is cliché to say that if someone needs no introduction, but it's absolutely true in this context nonetheless my job is to introduce so i will fulfill my responsibilities. she was born in washington, d.c. on september 14, 1970. it's interesting that also as the same date, not the exact date, but the same day that the justice was born and most of you probably know she was the first black woman to argue in the united states supreme court, first black federal district judge and argued ten cases in the supreme court and 19 of them and a record like i'm nowhere near. obviously she played a significant role in the litigation with thurgood marshall. justice jackson grew up in miami florida and attended private schools and graduated from harvard radcliffe graduated in

96 and after law school it's become more the tradition. you get to steven breyer here at the court and in addition to the professional experience in private practice she had other forms of public service and worked in the sentencing commission for three years and returned to the commission in 2010. she served on the u.s. district court from 2013 to 2021 and president biden appointed her to the dc circuit in 2021. long enough to get a cup of coffee basically and then was nominated to the supreme court and she was confirmed in 2022 and took the oath of office 2022. i am honored and grateful.

thank you for being here this evening. >> thank you all very much for that kind introduction and for the invitation to be with you this evening. my colleague and i support the important work of the historical society and of the work that the society is doing to preserve the court, the constitution and the federal judiciary to expand educational outreach to the public about the supreme court's history. it is a pleasure to host the program this evening here. tonight's lecture and conversation as you heard comes just days after the 70th anniversary of the court's decision in brown v board of education. given the history it is quite

meaningful for us to be in the courtroom tonight to take part in the commemoration of brown. in a few moments we will have the privilege of hearing how he resides in the same courthouse in charleston south carolina where the judge once served. you will learn a great deal about him tonight. judge richard is a native of south carolina and grandson of russian and polish and jewish immigrants. he is a graduate of duke university and the duke university school of law. he practiced law in columbia south carolina for 30 years specializing in complex civil litigation before president obama nominated him as he was district judge and he was

confirmed by the senate by unanimous consent in august of 2010. shortly after the confirmation, he discovered that his maternal grandparents had been sworn in as american citizens in the courtrooms to which he was assigned. a fact that he has shared with naturalization ceremonies. he's presided in the federal courthouse since then and has handled a number of significant cases including the 2017 trial who killed nine people attending a wednesday bible study out a methodist church. he is the author of numerous articles and books with a particular focus on american legal history. with his wife, who is here with us tonight, a retired historian the author of in pursuit of the tree of life, a history of the

early columbia south carolina. his most recent book from which tonight's talk is drawn is an example of courage, the blinding of sergeant and the awakening of president harry truman and judge. it's been referred to by "the new york times" is riveting, remarkable. by professor henry louis gates as a timely book a monumental achievement. they have two sons both of whom are with us tonight, richie who practices law in charleston and joseph graduated yesterday from the law school. i could go on but i won't because like you, i'm anxious to hear from my friends, so please join me in welcoming george

gurgle. [applause] >> thank you justice jackson for that kind introduction. we have been, initially we were sort of reconstructing our relationship. i've been confirmed about a year. justice jackson was on the sentencing commission nominated for the district court, but not yet confirmed. we were at a sentencing commission conference and had wonderful conversations and we had been friends and colleagues since, so we are so proud of her and i'm truly honored to be here with her on this event. december 9, 1952, thurgood marshall, the legendary chief counsel of the naacp stepped up to the podium in this courtroom and the argument the supreme court's long-standing president of plessy v ferguson should be overturned. he was followed by john w davis himself a living legend.

they argued that he remains good law. the two titans met at the crossroads of history with the outcome of this historic case to define what type of nation america would be. the stakes were huge with major portions of america remaining rigidly segregated in which many african-american citizens lived in a twilight world between slavery and freedom. would this country live up to its promise of equal justice guaranteed by the american constitution? then he would assume the case for this momentous argument between thurgood marshall and john w davis was brown v board of education. that assumption would be wrong. the case argued that day and continued into the next day involved a challenge to the

racially segregated public school system of claritin county south carolina. the case would later be consolidated with three others under the title brown v board of education. thurgood marshall argued the briggs case exclusively in the first round of arguments in 1952. believing it was the most important of the school segregation cases pending on the supreme court's dockets. the first case that was filed where the groundbreaking evidence of the studies was offered and the only case in which a dissent had been filed asserting that plessy should be overturned, that dissent by the district judge of charleston included in all government mandated public school segregation violated the equal protection of the 14th amendment and was unconstitutional.

when the supreme court issued its unanimous decision may 17, 1954, the standard was the centerpiece of what is regarded as the most important case in american history. it is altogether fitting that in this program honoring the 70th anniversary of the decision we turn our attention to the case into the remarkable dissent which helped this country on thai the knot of jim crow. it should be noted that the issue onto the docket of the supreme court did not to simply begin with the filing of the suit were the citizens petition that made the simple request of the black children of the claritin school district asked to ride the bus just like white children. it was a long forgotten incident of racial violence inflicted on

the returning african-american world war ii veteran that would set off a cascading series of events leading to the eventful day of 1952 when thurgood marshall stepped up to the podium in this courtroom to argue plessy v ferguson should be overturned. as world war ii came to an end, 900,000 african-americans, most from the south. returning the veterans expected more respectful treatment once they returned. instead of the old practices of the disenfranchised segregation persisted in returning veterans who resisted acquiescence to the

customs were often viewed as a threat to the racial status quo. the returning african-american veterans wanted their own new deal. late in the afternoon february 12, 1946, sergeant isaac watered, a decorated soldier boarded a greyhound bus in georgia after discharging hours earlier from camp gordon and was traveling to columbia south carolina been known to his hometown of winnsboro where he was the rendezvous with his wife after several years of subrogation occasioned by his for service. he struck an impressive figure in his uniform with sergeant stripes on his soldiers and battlefield decorations on his chest. during one of the frequent stops along the way, he approached the white bus driver and asked if he could step off the bus at the next stop to relieve himself. at that time interstate buses did not have restrooms and greyhound drivers were instructed to accommodate such

requests by their passengers. instead the bus driver snapped at watered. i ain't got time to wait and ordered him to return to his seat at the back of the bus. to the apparent astonishment of the bus driver, watered snapped back telling the driver talk to me like i'm talking to you. i am a man just like you. the stunned bus driver told watered to go ahead but at the next stop in south carolina the bus driver now no longer concerned with staying on schedule d part of his bus in search of a police officer to have ordered removed from the bus and arrested. watered soon found himself confronted by the police chief of bates berg who responded to woodard's effort to explain himself and they escorted him off to the town jail. on the way, woodard was repeatedly beaten with a blackjack and ultimately driving the end of the baton into both

of his eyes. the sergeant was then thrown in a semi conscious state into a jail cell for the night. when he awoke the next morning he realized he could not see. later that day, woodard was transferred to the veterans hospital in columbia where he was determined to be irreversibly blinded. accounts of the woodard beating and blinding were reported in the black press and received nationwide attention when orson welles focused on the incident in his weekly national radio program on abc radio over four successive weeks. mass meetings were soon organized and black communities across the nation protests his treatment. meanwhile other black veterans returning to their homes in the rural south confronted other incidents of racial violence including racially inspired murders. no state prosecuted those involved in any.

on september 1946 a delegation n of civil rights leaders met with president truman at the white house. a deeply distressed by this wave of racial violence prior to the meeting, truman's staff advised him to respond and there's little he could do to address these. civil rights leaders urged him to call congress back into a special session to address the spreading violence. he expressed sympathy but there was little he could do because it wasn't public support for the civil rights legislation. leading the group was water by the executive secretary of the naacp and one of the most loyal and prominent supporters in the civil rights community. it was apparent that the president did not appreciate the gravity of the situation.

he changed the discussion by sharing in detail the blinding of isaac ketanji. as the tragic story unfolded, he sat riveted and became agitated with the idea that a uniformed decorated american soldier had been so cruelly treated. abandoning the advice of his staff, he said my god i had no idea that it was as terrible as that. we've got to do something. at the following day he wrote his attorney general and shared with him the story of the blinding noting that the police officer deliberately put out the sergeant's eyes. truman made it clear that the time for federal action had now arrived. three business days after president truman's letter arrived at the department of justice the attorney general made the unprecedented announcement that the department of justice would prosecute the

police chief for the deprivation of the civil rights of isaac woodard. for violating the civil rights of a black citizen in the deep south they face daunting challenges. jury rosters were drawn from voter lists and african-americans were almost entirely disenfranchised. all-white juries and grand juries were generally hostile to any civil rights claims and prosecutors wanted nothing to do with civil rights cases. indeed, a decision by the justice department to charge the police chief with a misdemeanor is because it was doubted that he south carolina federal grand jury would return an indictment. ..

is the eighth generation charlestonian. and his father, and his father a confederate veteran. judge was initially skeptical of the several prosecutions. when the blinded sergeant took the stand detailed his vicious beating at the hands of the chief, judge or wearing a new a grave wrong had been done. he was equally aware his all white jury it would not convict the obviously culpable officer. he was right 28 minutes after deliberation commence the jury announce the acquittal of linwood shawl. shawl supporters cheered his acquittal notice judge waring's a wife, elizabeth who attended the trial left the back of the courtroom in tears. judge joined his wife later that evening both were traumatized by the trial over which you just presided. the trout force the judge and his wife to stare directly into the southern racial abyss of

youthat would forever transform both of them. later described the trial as his personal baptism of fire. it wiped baptism they returned home to charleston which was held in columbia resolved to learn more about issues of race and justice. a subject which that give it frankly little thought to it prior to the trial. these are not subjects could be openly discussed among white charlestonian's of the day wearing society to undertake their own self-directed study each evening after dinner elizabeth would read out loud a portion of a selected work to allow the judge to rest his eyes after a day of handling his judicial duties. the cutting edge work by gunnar

myrtle would later be cited at the famous footnote 11 in brown versus board of education. notice judge waring's inuit views race and justice evolved george elmore a black businessman filed suit in the federal district court in columbia in 1947 challenging the democratic party's all white primary. elmore was represented by thurgood marshall 39-year-old chief counsel of the naacp who was already developing a reputation of almost legendary proportion. skilled litigator and legal strategist. south carolina political leaders were united in their determination to preserve the

white primary notwithstanding clear u.s. supreme court precedent smith versus all right holding a white primary is unconstitutional. they don't always listen to what you all say, right customer judge waring understood that any decision recognizing the right of minority citizens to vote would produce an intensely hostile and possibly a violent public reaction. he came home the night he was assigned the case told elizabeth up to now we have been doing this privately but if i ruled rule forthe plaintiffs in this r lives will never be the same word elizabeth, now a convert to the cause says i am with you from start to finish. waring's conclude as he later shared with a historian after he retired, his choice was either quote to be entirely governed by the doctrine of white supremacy were to be a federal judge inside the law for july 12 , 47

judge waring issued his decision elmore versus rice declaring south carolina white primary unconstitutional. waring ended his order by stating it is time for south carolina to rejoin the union and to adopt the american way of conducting elections. the groundbreaking nature of the elmore decision was immediately appreciated by the leadership of the naacp in a private note the thurgood marshall hastings would later be appointed judge in american history wrote thurgood, i read south carolina decision three times i still do not believe it. and many respects i think this is your greatest legal achievement. the segregationists would not give up. soon a new party rule was adopted allowing blacks to vote in the priority primary so long as they pledge their support to racial segregation. no surprising new lawsuit was

filed. fights thurgood marshall. judge waring's summoned an emergency hearing in his courtroom required all 93 members of the democratic party executive committee to be present. these were the political powers of south carolina judge denounce their efforts to defy his earlier ruling faced with contempt could impose a fine or jail sentence. he wanted those present and if they violate his orders again there would be no fines. think about that one. there after african-americans by the thousands registered to vote in south carolina. the response of was thunderous. death threats written and oral or constant a cross was burned at the waring's residence bricks were thrown to the living room window. the order of attorney general

was provided 24 hour u.s. marshal security. time magazine described as that man they love to hate. also notice she was proving to be a person of courage. the purpose of the vilification was intended to he did not work he continued his study and reflection on race, injustice and america became convinced the foundation of jim crow segregation, the supreme court 1896 in plessy v ferguson was legally, historically morally wrong. after the supreme court ruled with the plaintiff at 90 and civil rights cases issued in june 19501 involving a separate but not equal texas law school sweat versus painter and a graduate school for an african-american student was required to sit in the hall outside the classroom mclaurin

versus oklahoma board of regents. judge was convinced the supreme court was ready to reverse plessy f a proper school segregation case can be placed on its docket. judge noted on his docket in charleston a case for south carolina sought to equalize the facilities the districts in of black and white schools. at the time, litigating civil rights cases in the south was a very tough slog for naacp lawyers. strategy of using plessy as a sword. they were not challenging segregation they were challenging the lack of equality. this was a highly successful legal strategy they were winning their cases. it was a brilliant kind of

strategy it avoided challenging segregation. the original but has controversy because every time plessy was used to hold the rights of african-american citizens it was in another way sick curing the inferior legal status. the original complaint did not explicitly allege segregated public schools were unconstitutional. that was on axle and they were not asserting that at the time. marshall pio at the charleston courthouse on november 17 , 50 pretrial conference on the friday before the trial was to begin on monday. he was advised the judge wanted to see him in chambers. after being ushered into the judge's office without opposing counsel present he told marshall i do not want to try another separate but equal case and bring me a frontal attack on segregation.

marshall responded judge, it is on our agenda it is just not tonight we don't think this is the case. we don't think this is the time what he was really saying is they will kill my plaintiffs in south carolina if we do this for judge was unpersuaded telling marshall this is the case. this is the time. marshall urged the judge to think practically noting any decision by him overturning would be reversed on appeal by the fourth circuit. since the challenge of public school segregation contested the constitutionality of the state law he would request the appointment of a three-judge panel the appeal would automatically go into the docket of the united states supreme court up to this point naacp highly successful legal strategy had been carefully build a one case on top of another. never trying to get ahead of the supreme court. the path waring was suggesting

was a bold and unflinching attack on segregation routes in branch. a few minutes after this dramatic encounter burn can be in the pretrial conference publicly pressed marshall for the use challenging the constitutionality of public school segregation. marshall stated he was and agreed to the pending lawsuit re- filed a new complaint the first frontal attack on public school segregation in american history. newly filed case was tried in the charleston federal courthouse in may 1951 before a three-judge panel concluded judge waring. prior years of civil right cases in the south were sparsely attended by members of the black community less than be identified as members of the naacp. that you would get you fired if you are a schoolteacher it would be seen as a challenges to the racial status quo. on the morning of may 28, 1951,

the sun rose in charleston african-americans line up at the federal courthouse down broad street this far as the eye could see. hoping to observe what many thought might be the most important case in american history process thurgood marshall entered the charleston federal courthouse that morning he turned to his young assistant said bob it is all over. gardner his young assistant was mystified and said what did he mean? he said they're not scared anymore. those in attendance in the courtroom were not disappointed by the performance of thurgood marshall. the trial court the testimony of doctor kenneth clark who had done groundbreaking research and the effects of segregation on black children using black-and-white goals that crowd was entertained thurgood marshall devastating

cross-examination of the state's key witness whose last name was crow. you cannot make it up, okay pathmark is judge waring anticipated the majority of the panel ruled self criminal laws mandated segregated schools were lawful under the plessy doctrine. but judge waring fully aware he was writing a dissent for the ages wrote an elegant and brilliant attack on the foundations of segregation in america. he stated quote we must face without evasion or equivocation the question as to whether segregation in education in our schools is legal under the 14th amendment. judge waring discussed in some detail the testimony of doctor kenneth clark regarding his studies which he stated demonstrated the humiliation of being set aside to associate with others of different colors has a damaging effect upon the mental processes of our young.

the recent decisions of the supreme court striking down segregated schools of higher education judge waring concluded segregation in education could never produce a quality it is an evil that must be eradicated. adopted and practice in the state of south carolina must go and go now. segregation is per se inequality. judge waring noted in his dissent the targeted retaliation had experienced in the result of their participation in the case which has included the loss of jobs calling in of farm loans the failure of the local fire department to respond to a fire that burned on the home of the plaintiffs community leader reverend joseph delayed for judge waring stated have shown

courage in bringing and presenting this because the face of the long-established age old way of life the state of south carolina has adopted, practice, lived in since and as a result of the institution of human slavery. waring's dissent issued in june 1951 was the first challenge the government mandated segregation by federal judge justice harlan's historic dissent and plessy 55 years earlier. in early 1952 some six months after briggs versus elliott dissent announced his retirement exhausted his ostracism and charleston moved to new york city. followed closely later segregation cases in virginia, delaware, kansas all were consolidated for the united states supreme court with briggs under the name brown versus board of education. all the other school desegregation cases involving 14

different judges the only way it waring concluded public school segregation even if the facilities were equal violated the 14th amendment of the united states constitution. mate 171954 the supreme court handed down unanimously landmark decision in brown versus board of education the court found public school segregation generates the feeling of inferiority and children may affect the hearts and minds in a way unlikely to ever be undone citing the dull studies of doctor clark. the court explicitly cast aside separate but equal doctrine adopted the per se rule all government mandated public school segregation was unconstitutional. first advance by waring in his briggs dissent on the night of the brown decision the leadership to the small upper east side apartment to toast the man they viewed as a father of

brown. judge waring both chief justice warren shortly after the brown decision his admiration for the clear-cut decision when you decide the case i've been pretty lonely up to that time. the chief justice respondent waring was the one to be admired. you had to do it the hard way. he was always philosophical about what he called the unpleasant repercussion of the civil rights decision an oral history late in life waring observed taken the whole thing and balance you do not often in life of the opportunity to do something you really think is good. a great stroke of fortune came down my alley the other don't amount to anything. they're offset by what i think is really important contribution to the history of our country. thank you.

[applause] thank you. our rates. is this on? could all hear me? wonderful. that was really wonderful. really informative we have a few follow-up questions and they will turn it over to the audience requests that will be fine. >> you mention judge was alienated from the white political establishment. and south carolina in particular. do you have a sense of how he was received by other judges? >> it was kind of interesting. and white primary care since they were on appeal the fourth circuit unanimously affirmed his two decisions. jon j parker had been nominated to the court at one point in the late 20s did not get confirmed

because of his perceived views on race. he wrote the decision affirming he was an admirer. around the country he was greatly admired. he knew the justices of this court very well. they admired him. there was a point where he came to washington for a series of meetings. but with this chief justice. he wrote a letter later to thurgood marshall and said i have met with the chief justice. he shares our views, isn't that interesting? they view it as he had resistant. their discussion began with truman saying you know the judge of the blind nigro and he said mr. president i tried that case.

one thing the judge would often say is kind of a figure in the late 40s. reporters would ask him fairly commonly what got into you? how did you change? and he would sail while on the bench i developed a passion for justice. that is a wonderful statement there's a lot of other judges who apparently did not develop at that time a passion for justice. it was like there's a clamoring to follow him. frank johnson and the judges is later pretty started retired by the time they get on the bench their eyes and our appointees of the time is out there by himself. so i think the answer was what it had become probably the most reviled man in the white south

he had at minimum the grudging respect of his colleagues in some admiration. >> you talked a little bit about president truman his knowledge of the story. your book talks about how that incident motivated the president to make some changes. could you tell us about those? >> that session in september 1946 walter wright shared with them the blinding of isaac watered her other incidents in the south hit him in a way he would repeatedly tell the story of the blinding of isaac watered. almost anyone who would listen to him. in that same letter he writes the attorney general says basically prosecute the guy.

he also says we've got to do more than prosecute. he said i am going to appoint the first presidential commission on civil rights. that commission which was eight landmark event in and of itself issued a report within 11 months to secure these rights and offered four or five dozen suggestions of how to undo jim crow. many of these are the basic blueprints for the johnson administration. congress was not going to go along with any of it at the time harry truman had one thing he could do. he could issue executive order d segregated in the armed forces of the united states. and in july of 1948 he did just that in the middle of his presidential campaign and what is a remarkable letter i found in the truman library, a friend of his from missouri wrote him

and said harriet get off the civil rights then you're going to lose the election. you're going to lose the south. truman wrote him back and said to his friend ernest robert, ernie you don't know what i know. he tells in the story of the blinding of isaac watered pretty said it might lose this election over this issue it will have been for a good cause. and truman's second term he fully desegregated the military. strong resistance of the army brass. when he left office in early 195295% of american troops more in desegregated units. the first multi racial institution in american life. so here is the ironing. here's the story about a blinded veteran that no one remembered who influence, maybe the two

seminole events of the early civil rights met the desegregation of the armed forces in brown versus board. >> tell me how you came up on the story? how did you do the research? you mention being in the truman library. >> first fault you remember this pretty become a district judge at lands on you. you are kind of like oh my god it is the real thing. you are so burdened with the responsibility. i wanted to know i have a love of history. want to know the court particular wants to about the most fascinating member of our court. through all of those discussions and there been articles at the time they've never been good work. nobody really answered this question. what change? what motivated this dramatic from being basically a mainstream democratic political

to being a civil rights visionary, how did this happen? as i looked into it i found a letter he had written in 1945 in which he described himself as a graduate us which meant he did not want the federal courts or civil rights groups he thought it was necessary for a gradual evolution of southern life. which meant 10 years from never. by 1947 he is threatening to jail or white politicians for interfering with the rights of african-americans. something happened in the two year period and in dead and the middle of it is the trial for the blinding of isaac watered. i started with the hypothesis and that was it. midway through it might research someone offered me an oral history, a tape of an oral history of a woman name rubi

cornwell who is that made trick of the charleston civil rights she was very close. she is being interviewed was talking about judge wearing and in the middle of it i was sitting there listening with headphones she said she no sayst you knowchange them, don't shoo. [laughter] wow. here it comes it was the blinded negro sgt he told me it was his baptism by fire. there had it now i had that part the story i believe contributed mightily to the brown decision. here was the story of a blinded african-american soldier. i asked how did this case get prosecuted? in 1946 the justice department was not prosecuting white cops

for blinding black men that just was not happening. as i dug into the story i came across this letter from harry truman to tom clark i realize harry truman had ordered it. that is how it happens. now i had the story to two major events in the early civil rights movement came from this event nobody remembered, inspired to these men to act in a courageous way. >> were going to turn to the audience and when just one more question about finding unusual historical facts. how did you find out about the conversation between thurgood marshall and judge wearing? >> i wasn't there. [laughter] will start with that. there is a gentleman by the name of alexander rivera who was a reporter for the pittsburgh career as that was the naacp he

always had a camera around his neck he righted himself on being a photojournalist was a fraternity brother of marshall and a very close friend they traveled together when their covid trials. marshall was summons to waring's office rivera was with him. he walked to the door and when he came out marshall told him what happened. after he passed rivera's that i need to tell is secret because i know a story. he told it twice oral history section at the department of duke and north carolina. here i have a rather startling

story of communication regarding the most important case in american history. and i was nervous about it. i only had a one source, this one guy. i was at a meeting of judges there was nathaniel jones who'd been a carter appointee on the sixth circuit he had been general counsel of the naacp a little he was on our mutual friend said to me go talk to nay he might know something about judge wearing. so i pulled him aside and set i'm working on this book. i was wondering -- mickey set a writing a biography of waring questioner said no, writing about a story i started telling him a little bit about it and he said that mckay said have you ever heard about a conversation

between waring and thurgood marshall in his chambers question when he said yes, i know that story. said who told you? he said walter white. the autobiography we mentioned did not want to describe it for the same reason you're asking me about it. i have not read his autobiography. i went and read it. he says to attack segregation root and branch basic nay comese are talking about? he said you need to publish until the whole story. i thought i had two sources. >> are as written from the audience would like to ask a question? >> yes, ma'am. >> thank you very much for your

remarks. i am curious to know, judge, if you perceive a difference in how your book plays a role in the concept of justice especially with regard to race. how you thought about it before 2020 and the national conversation about race in today? >> i have got to say i was already there before. by 2020 the book was out. came out in 2019. i get were frequently asked about the ruth case influenced me and it didn't. i'd mostly read the book by that point. wando thanks it got to do this by the supreme court historical society are so important we got to remember our history. is a lot of efforts to model that story. i think telling the story and a candid way in the opening of the book the first 40 or 50 pages

are pretty tough read. they describe the blinding of isaac watered it's not a pretty sight. it's important for people to appreciate the brutality of jim crow segregation. it was not a benign thing everyone was happy to go along with. underlying it was the threat and use of violence were necessary. isaac watered that day was viewed as a threat to the social order. black veterans were viewed as a threat they came back and wanted a better deal than they have had before. so i have got to say i think telling this history is really an important thing to do. the george floyd episode brought maybe a younger generation knowledge of some of this history. but police violence has been an issue many years before 2020.

>> how did sgt watered with about therest of his life? >> during -- when these events are roads isaac watered it became avery well-known figure. he gave talks around the country. there is a benefit concert in new york which is 22000 people attended. and others perform, joe lewis was a chairman of the committee. it's a very interesting memo around naacp papers. staff members wrote walter rightand said in 10 years no onl remember his name. she is worried about was going to happen to him. black men had enough problems in 1946 being blind was pretty tough.

he initially really struggled. the military took the view he was still wearing his uniform which was required until he got home for said he was discharged five hours of reason blinded. he did not qualify i've got to give credit they persisted for years urging congress to change that in 1961 they changed it. full benefits and backpay that tremendously changed his life in the 50s he was working as a blind man selling newspapers in lower manhattan. we have seen blind people do those things. at one time he had a social worker at the veterans administration he wrote and said i am so poor i could not afford a winter coat.

after 1961 he becomes far more economically stable. heat begins buying real estate. kind of like that mr. klein. one of the countries leading real estate lawyer. he funds the landlord. got to know his nephew very well who was his caregiver who said he is the guy who collected rent. he said his uncle could make a nickel scream. he supported two sons his elderly parents, he felt very fulfilled. but in 1950 6a jet magazine wrote a story called america's most forgotten man. so down and then sort of up, here is the tragedy. he never knew his impact on

harry truman and judge wearing he never knew that story. and his family which is very proud of all of this there are very aware of the member at joe louis and have limousine to his house to pick him up for the concert and all of that. his courage of standing up for himself at a transformative effect on american civil rights history. >> i want to jump in and ask one thing. as mentioned in your book about your traveling and meeting with local town leaders print this is a town where all this happened and people had no idea. and so what would you say explains their lack of recall? have they done anything to correct that? >> there is an interesting problem of amnesia relating to civil rights of violence. there just is. it was no exception.

i go there i wanted to make sure i knew were certain events took place. i thought i knew at the bus stop was not really -- and he didn't have a building it was a place i wanted to make sure he knew where it was and i sorted the details of that tragic night. i called the town attorney and said would you meet me there on a saturday morning and walk me through? he had grown up there and help to meet with logistics and all of this. and so he meets me and with it is the mayor whose last name was scholl. and so we are walking and we go

to where he got off the bus. go around the corner where he was beaten in a storefront and blinded per legal up the street express a good the next day for drunk and disorderly conduct. he grabs them by my elbow and pulls me aside. i'm not related to the police chief i am from missouri. [laughter] quickly do question because i am a harry truman fan. so he says to meet what can we do to make this right? we have a series of discussion

and the town attorney about what they could do but they did a couple of things. first they went into court and asked for the unjust conviction to be overturned is blinded the day after. they erected a historic marker, candidly telling the truth of the blinding of isaac watered by their police chief. they held a ceremony in which the city council, the town council and several hundred people walks the path from the bus stop, around the corner to where he was blinded. and to the sites of the jail which is now a cleared area and they erected the historic barker. they have now announced they are turning that space into a park

animal title of the isaac at thc watered unity park. "new york times"'s atomic got it right they acknowledge their history is kind of a wonderful story tragic in the inception but redemptive in the way the town dealt with it. >> of time for one more question. none on this happened right after world war ii. i believe. [inaudible] they were inspired by jim crow laws for. >> that is correct but once what extent judge wearing was aware of that. what was happening in europe? >> the answer is he did know about the nazis and the death

camps. and actually, when he retired he became an active participant, a member of the board of christians and jews. he was also the board which is kind of interesting. so he was aware the american fought for liberty and had thought for the end of the police state and the whole nazi regime. and yes i think it influenced him in his own views on race and justice. >> could you all please join me in thanking judge for a wonderful presentation. [applause] [applause] >> if you've not done already and suggest you go right out and

order the book on amazon. it's a fascinating read regrets requestmy publisher would like . in return for the favorite you did earlier by that very, very nice complement or pledge of historical society but we appreciate that very much. so please keep that in mind as we enjoy the rest of the evening pretty obvious when you think justice jackson and judge judge gergel for being here tonight this book is a fascinating read by thought i knew a fair amount about brown versus board of education but i can tell you i learned a lot about the details that are extremely interesting but i do commend it to you. i also want to thank our cosponsors in the white house historical association, u.s. capitol historical society, point out specifically we are joined by matthew costello and jane campbell. we look forward to the next program we can put together with you and we look forward to that. now we have a reception will be right out in the great hall right outside these doors we

will enjoy the rest of the evening together. and hopefully if you have some civic questions you can raise them but the good judge. on that note we are adjourned. thank you. [applause]