your position on gay marriage? >> apparent live i did. i didn't surprise me and i didn't surprise people who knew me because i think -- i grew up in california, i feel it's wrong and i've always felt it's wrong to discriminate against people who are gay or lesbian, and when i was first asked to take this case, i thought it was something that i could do and that i wanted to do. so so i was surprised that people were surprised because i'm a conservative, a lot of people were, and i felt that it was then my mission to try to convince as many of. the as i could that this is the right place to be. >> host: what's the conservative case for gay marriage. >> guest: the conservative case for gay merge is easy. these or two loving people who want to come together in an enduring relationship and form a part of a community and have a family and be part of our society and to live together. what could be more conservative

than that? we should want -- we as conservatives should want people who love one another to want to get married. marriage is a conservative value. and when gay people want to get married, it should be the same thing. they have the same aspirations, the same fears and hopes the rest of us do. we should support that. >> host: for those who may not know what is the long relationship of you and your co-author? how did you first immediate? david and i knew one another before the bush versus gore case. most people know us as opt -- opposite sides. he represented vice president gore represented governor bush. in the bush vs. gore case that decided the 2000 election. after the election we thought we had great respect for one another. our wives are both lawyers. we started to get together and enjoy evenings together over dipper and the more we spent with one another, the more we

realized we should work together on something. when this case came along i called up david and thought it was important to represent to the american people that it was not a conservative or liberal issue. it was an american issue. and that if two lawyers two are well-known on opposite sides of the political spectrum could come together people could see it as an american issue, not a gay or heterosexual issue or conservative or liberal issue but an issue about american values and american rights and freedoms. and we tried to convey that in -- that point of view. >> host: this book is written by two lawyers. can laymen understand it? >> guest: well, we hope. we thought it was exceedingly important to express the case that we took from the very beginning, all the way to the supreme court in terms that lawyers would learn as a lesson but also as people would value

as a journey of individuals and freedom and people and we tried very hard to make sure we could communicate with people who are not lawyers. the worst thing in the world is for a lawyer to talk like a lawyer. people don't like that. they don't understand it. they don't want to hear it. it's important for lawyers to understand that you have to speak english. you have to speak in language that people understand, and we tried to convey our emotions our feelings, and our strategy in terms that all americans could understand. especially young people who might aspire to be lawyers or people that were studying political science. we tried to reach out to that wide audience. >> host: what's your sense of how quickly it seems gay marriage is being accepted and spread across the country? >> guest: i'm glad you asked that question. we started this case there were three states in which individuals could mary the person they love if it happened

to be a person of the same sex. today, five years later, 33 states recognize marriage equality. can you imagine -- and the american public was against marriage equality by a factor of 17 points or something like that. now it's maybe 10 or 12% on the other side. young americans, people under 30, 75 to 80% believe in marriage equality and respect the rights of gay and lesbians to get married. that all took place in the course of five or six yours. a remarkable transformation of american public opinion, install favor of people who love one another. it's a very very encouraging thing. >> host: what about the republican party? >> guest: the republican party is getting there. when we filed our briefs in the supreme court, we had a brief filed by some 30 prominent members of the republican party who supported our case

including ken melman former chairman of the republican national committee, rob portman, an important senator who is a republican and more and more republicans are understanding that marriage between people who love one another is a value that republicans have to support or they're not going to ever win elections. this is important not just the gay and lesbian people but people across the political spectrum who believe in american rights. and republicans will not be accepted as majority party if they wish to achieve a majority status in this country, unless they recognize the rights of human beings to have that kind of freedom and liberty. >> host: any gay marriage issues coming back before the supreme court, and if so, are you involved in them? >> guest: i'm not involved in it but we had several cases, including the virginia case the supreme court decided not take theirs year but there's another case involving kentucky,

tennessee, and a couple of other states, that the supreme court is considering right now. i believe the supreme court will take that case. i'm hoping that the supreme court will hear that case before the end of next june, when they decide their cases for this term. i'm not involved in it now but i am rooting for those lawyers who are handling this case and if they want any help from me, they will have it. >> host: ted olson, david boies, redeeming the case for marriage equality. this is booktv on c-span. ...

[inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon. good afternoon, miami.