the results of that conversation with a set of guidelines was that the students recognized the policy it should have had given us circumstance for and for that reason if and other reasons we are having workshops. silicosis to make couple points the presidential election is exciting but to beat an active citizen and one to quickly address the question of how to read it here? derail a primary process that has the dismal the voter turnout for igo to every four years because that is when accounts but

that is and when it counts. for so many to try to build the capacity. >> i am the graduate and many mysteries of the public to hear more about the connection of the act the defect that you mentioned that we are engaged in appearing our own opinion. so maybe with the connection between the history of the boston tea party and a protest on wall street analysts raised laugh father who's studied american history through the age of 91 without twitter or face but and not owning a computer but you're reading the newspaper could have

relevant and current conversations. and ilan that into seek out the sources with the existing world view. but it is so easy to just get comfortable with that that, local exchange may be one month ago. and complaining hell, of "washington post" never covers a negative story about hillary clinton? but he was very polite.

so i rollback and i said you reprint or on line? and then to disable. then i thought that they would either not respond but instead he said faq i missed this i usually just read andy davis source but the point was genuinely he was serious.

and sometimes that isn't totally true but he was serious and genuine rethought that we're totally ignoring the stories. in my pointed out then he found out about it so i wish i could have that type constructive conversation with all the readers but health and that more take attitude to be willing to except information that they don't normally rely upon. >> the prerequisite for civility is earnestness that fundamental earnestness whether backyard barbecues duende gerrymandering was not out-of-control going back to their districts out of control are going back to

their districts every few days but that is the foundation to have a civil society. but the way it is most relatable about your father is an american historian we have the honor tonight other bits water presents it is a "house of cards" election the most rancorous cenacle violent and i fear for the west wing election. [laughter] with the consultant on the west wing and that was my political education and that was the profile in courage not cowardice but doll highest ideals and not the sioux were -- sewer. >> we will leave it there and thank you for your time.

[applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

been. [applause] kiev senegalese air and a gentleman pdf we are friends. i met him before he became prime minister and lead us stayed in contact with the rest of our lives.

when i was invited to give this speech and became evident that the house that he lived was close to where or devastation the before infantry division of united states. for this occurred before or was henry kissinger so i treat that several times and

so i have a great feeling i thought did what i could do here is to drive into action from when he was prion minister wants sometimes we agreed occasionally we did not, but we always respected as one of the important figures of our time for europe that is historic so

with those elections he was so elated that nixon called me on the telephone every hour to update me on the status. in terms of hierarchy, of course, it should have been the away but parted his enthusiasms view was selected by those conservative members of parliament both he and nixon

and readmitted into the establishment so that calculation and analytical skill. in each case and the qualities which invoked in him unexpected episodes. i have the comparison with nixon of those presidents who honored me to allow me

to participate in foreign policy that nixon was the best prepared attendee impact of the international system to the nixon administration and to transform the pre-eminence to be held together of shared history through informal arrangement.

and with its operation to have that diplomatic practice with the element of paternal guidance. if necessary to have a sense of guilt if we deviated from a less sophisticated partner. with those to governments and with those leaders of both parties, to transform into an atlantic partnership .

to continue in that management relations with the soviet union were closely coordinated. . .

president and the prime minister was a key element of american policy. it was each, the delicate passage that issues allowed the relationship which were inherent in the nature of the problem and not in the policies of the eli elite. the objective of the organization was the security of individual states based on the

definition of the strategies to deal with them. however they feel to express the identity by way of institutions that would merge into a supernatural entity. it would therefore not always be able to be recognized. in the development component, structural issues. the administration inherited a war in vietnam and it didn't

recognize the guarantor. some of the allies more rapid withdrawals provided relief. the administration put forward a new concept and opened to china and engaged in negotiations with the soviet union. this needed to be conducted with

a minimum consultation to avoid a paralyzing domestic debate. for each person in his own opening to china, the suddenness of the policy implied a sense of unnecessary preemptive. in the end he achieved the same goals on the same path and the policy would stand as a monument to each incumbency in office. these differences might have

strained some relationships were it not for th those responsibler the conduct including the level where they provided extraordinary inspiration. having said all this, the role of the state is to take the society from where it is to where it will never be and peaceful account among the important statesmen of this period. because they inherited the truth is a key figure of the

conservative party and later as prime minister the ambivalence about its absence between developing closer relations in the united states, managing the common grounds, or entering europe it had rejected the plan and european defense community. even churchill argued it was between europe for the open seat and if they would choose the latter. he rejected the inevitability of such choice. he was mindful in the common

market. he managed britain in a way that combines a dramatic adaptation of the traditional policies and determination to preserve the interests. his successor got the outcome among the public by the referendum that indicated its approval. he welcomed the following statement. i have looked for this for 25 years.

it was the prime minister about what britain into the community so i'm delighted that it's working out as it is. over the decades it was filled with the essence of both the atlantic relationship and special relationships were preserved but now decades later raising the issues in a new and even more complex ones than the challenge was how to maintain

unity under the conditions of approaching the appeal from the soviet union. today it is a far-reaching. new capabilities in the technology and multiple aspects like cyber and artificial intelligence for the strategy does not yet exist. they are accompanied by the forms of international conduct an imagined a decade ago.

they led from this and it's not always in alignment. the most significant then becomes what concept of world order can restore stability or establish criteria by which to fashion a common design with the atlantic alliance. what is the relationship of the european union to the creation of world order? the influence that combines the relations unconstrained and if

so how will the eight possible to avoid an even more cataclysmic outcome than the two world wars. in these circumstances, breck which was first seen as a domestic issue is taking on a more general significance. on one level it will lead to new negotiations on the british relationship with europe.

it is overwhelming on both countries and both parties and the world order into the interest is to encourage that process of splitting europe and britain and help the process and that's a great locations in 50. there are the issues of 1973 in the new sector there will be three elements. the european union, britain relates the special negotiated relationships with europe as the

custodian of common security to maintain a healthy and the articulation of the identity the combined with the partnership. can a monetary union be maintained without a common critical policy and a common strategy to emerge from such a structure what is important to understand about the president world for 300 years the world has been organized on principles first developed by europe and

the idea of the nationstate, the notion of sovereignty. the concept of the system. in the operation of the system, europe, britain and the united states have played a decisive role. europe and america must not drift apart. they need the respective

naturalism and the centers of power all around the world shouldn't be tempted. in the disputes of the atlantic community or the disputes in europe, infrastructure and emerging britain could perform its historic and global role contributing to a world order that is stable and forward-looking through the atlantic partnership. while undermining the diversity and inspires loyalty and creativity.

it is not bureaucratic but it is a moral and political test. i first met him before he became prime minister and i stayed in contact with him until the auspices of the aspen institute which mess in the united states and iran in 1978 and germany in 1980. my last encounter was at the funeral in 2001 that was attended on its own as a token

of friendship because of their common service. i wrote to him to tell him how much i admire his service to the cause of freedom and the agency of britain with europe and he replied telling me that on the big issues, he and i had seen nothing in the same way. as strange as it may seem to

those that knew ted he performed great services for europe and between the countries is a legacy worthy of recognition. europe and america hopefully together to face the challenges. [applause] for those that knew ted extremely well, i think as we all know, he could occasionally be a little prickly.

on one occasion he was dining at the downing street with a lady on either side of him come and he wrote a note that said prime minister, please speak to the women on either side of you and he replied back i have. and that was the end of the conversation that evening. on the very big issues, you touched on domain member of them this evening. let me turn to something more implicit in what you were saying. when you heard the secretary of state. we are quite as clear these days

up with the order is or what it stands for, and i recall now george bush senior referring to the world order emerging. i'm not sure entirely what that order may be coming and i welcome your thoughts given what you've had a to say about the atlantic relationships and the importance of utilizing the prestige of the united states and of europe. >> i studied at the university that was based on the nationstate and its developed at the end of the 30 years which the doctrine of sovereignty

emerged as the ideas of international laws laid out the conduct and at that time it had been thought about in part by religious beliefs in the societies and it was agreed it was the subject of international policies, but international aggression assisted of the borders in violation of borders of established state.

the basic structure of the international order i was in office and when he came into office was placed on the nationstate and the principal elements of security are still in a state of fear -- europe plus russia through all of its emphasis. it was beginning to emerge in the 70s in the countries like india.

since the beginning they are international law. the middle east parole of its conflict between the various states, some of them radical, some of them less so. the current situation is radically different. the major countries feel they are not obliged to observe it. in addition, states are now emerging based on the principles of legitimacy that on that spa

space. it was just a contributing element, but now the nature of the structure in itself becomes an international insecurity. and. and now we have the extraordinary scope going far beyond what we experienced. we were deeply concerned that the catastrophic impact, but

essentially it was confined to two countries and it turned out to be more or less correct. there are many countries and forms of technology that have emerged cyber or artificial intelligence which create totally new business. so before they can produce a come of the countries haven't necessarily defined with the

role is in these new circumstances. we have a peopled in many simultaneously but they are not caused by the same issues. this is by it so much attention to what can be done in the region but this is a sketch of the difference between the period in which he was in offi office. >> [inaudible]

do you think that it needs refreshing and it's working well and are you concerned that the way in which europe on a number of occasions seems to have different views than the united states. you asked the very penis clustering with this sort of a member. did yonumber. you do know what it is today? >> i know what it is today but i might not like what it says. a fundamental challenge is to define what it is trying to do. what is it trying to achieve and what is it that we will achieve

only as allies and if we are obliged to do without allies and they would understand these answers but if the dialogue is yet to take place. >> how do you think in present circumstances we can bring the collective will closer together than it currently appears to be? >> it depends on how this result. i cannot imagine an atlantic strategy which we are not

attempting to find common answers. for this point of view, figuring that it was a matter for britain to decide, i think to the extent that britain played an active role trying to add to the description, it will play an extremely important role to get an answer. it cannot be that the united states prescribes all the answers but it criticizes.

but in the well understood alliance, we would go and come to some conclusion about how to preserve the issues and not continue to do these things. >> if you look right across the middle east, you see the most extraordinary complex relationship, but figure would you begiwhere wouldyou begin asf state today to unravel the chaos to what we now see happening in the destruction of the nation and the huge numbers of people who happen to be caugh happenede wrong place at the wrong time and in the midst of the wrong

dispute? >> it emerged in 1919 and it was based on the concept that there would be the fear in the european sense for the collection of the groups and facilitated the management from the outside.

it is a majority that is governed by the field and that works well as long as britain and france were the major custodians of the. with the decline of the british and french power and in the absence of any other outside power, bu the states became frae to apply to the principal to make the situation more complicated.

so in iraq it moved, and we thought thi that this would leao democracy. though it could lead to democracy, it led to the civil war and proposed to be removed again believing that this inflicted the will of the people in the countries that were determined not to be governed by any of the other principles that existed and libya did the same thing.

the issue is can we salvage the situation by finding a coalition government and it is essential that we go beyond the tactical management of the situation and hopefully in some consensus that the allies have two the solution that is more likely to bring stability and peace and takes into account some of the elements that i mentioned here because i think a pure tactical management of this crisis is guaranteed. >> now we are going to come to

questions. who would like to ask doctor kissinger the first question from the floor? >> you played a remarkable role in stabilizing the world. you left it in a much safer place not least because you made this great contribution by developing the detente meeting and common interests and who rules and then developing detente on many fronts. having left the world a safer place if they are i there in thd comparing it with the world now, would you say it is a safer place now still order less safe place? >> it was more dangerous and sends and it would be really catastrophic.

now it is more complex and in the long-term, more dangerous because they are at the disposal of the people. they don't have the same limits that existed and it could lead to complications. [inaudible] so many have nuclear weapons and if we get involved with the major countries, it could affect

the balance between major countries and major countries could be tempted to intervene much like world war i started. [inaudible] that technology creates opportunities bu that you can ue to manage. if you look at the history of world war i.

[inaudible] hi would add that they were late to react instantaneously into the thinking maybe less. i think we live in a more dangerous world. so we need more long-range thinking.

>> one final question. three years ago i had a long conversation with the former minister in berlin on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of britain joining the european community and the one question i asked him his wife was germany always so much more enthusiastic about the british membership of the european community than france and he doesn't hesitate at all. he said it's because we were convinced as britain was in the european community america would trust us that if britain was

not, they would think it was all a terrible plot. do you think that if, when britain leads the european union america will trust it less? >> it was created before there was a european community. because we have a historic relationship and also because i hope that they ended their presence with a klingon to play a role in emphasizing the

importance of the atlantic relationship. so in my thinking, i would hope that out of all of these discussions emerge as a britain that is closely contributed to europe but also represents the conscience of a relationship so i wouldn't think it's necessary to make that choice but i do think that britain, britain's greatness was developed in the period before so i think britain

could continue to play a major role. >> on behalf of every one i would like to say how much we have enjoyed tonight what has been a memorable

this is from the equal justice conference in washington, d.c.. it's an hour. welcome to the equal justice works conference. i am the proud executive director. you are in for a treat today a conversation between the justice of the united states supreme court and the judge e on the cot of appeals for the seventh circuit. let me quickly get, where debato they fit like liquor, you took it. that's okay. so, justice kagan needs no

introduction. serving as the associate white house counsel, the dean of harvard law school and first solicitor general seized 112 justice and fourth woman to serve on the united states supreme court. our moderator has also dedicated all of her career to public service. she was the first woman of color to serve as division chief in the office in chicago and the u.s. district court for the district in illinois. she is the first and only judge of color on the u.s. court of appeals. she cofounded just the beginning foundation a pipeline organization that aims to increase diversity in the profession and judiciary by inspiring more young diverse people to consider legal careers. for the next 60 minutes, judge williams will have a conversation about her career and long-term commitment to justice. time is short but before i jump

in with me introduce the audience to the panelists. these are public interest minded students that have come from all over the country to seek their fortunes in public interest law. [laughter] >> they are interviewing for jobs in a career fair with 165 public interest employers and they want to find their path to devoting part of their career to public service so they look forward to hearing your advice on how they might be able to do that and learning from your examples without further ado ado let's see pass it on over to judge williams, my hero. ' good afternoon. i know we can do better than that.

[applause] we are thrilled to have the justice join us for this conversation. particularly while we celebrate equal justice works and because she's such a huge supporter of public interest works, in this conversation we will find out how and why she became the justice she is and why she has that kind of commitment. you grew up in new york you're not as a lawyer and activist and your mother was a teacher. how did they influence you? >> first let me say how thrilled i am to be here today. [laughter] with you, judge williams and all of you. it's a great seeing you all aree doing at the start to look for ways to promote the public good so you should all feel great

about yourself and what you're doing here. they started you on the path. what is it they instilled in you that helped you become the person and justice march of a? >> you couldn't have grown up in my house without a commitment to public service. my father was a lawyer and as close to i grew up in new york city and everyone thinks of it as big law firms but my father just sort of put a shingle out whesingle woundwhen he graduatew school and he worked.

he settled into representing the tenet groups as new york city became more and more cooperati cooperative. but he was always involved in community life and never held elected office. but for many years he was the chair of a community board in manhattan and he worked on projects of all kinds that tried to stop the expansion. it is important to think of the community that you lived in that were bigger than yourself and so

i tried to live by that example. my father's commitment all the time when they made choices about my life, my mother was a great teacher so my father was a lawyer, my mother was a teacher, i've done both. my brothers are also teachers in new york city or have been. my older brother just retired. so education was important in our family and we had a lot of opportunities but my mother was like you've got to take advantage of those educational opportunities and she was a pusher and a striker and she thought education was the most miraculous thing in the world

and i think she communicated that to all of us. >> she communicated how valuable it was. >> she was my first writing instructor and i have to say she was a tough teacher. everybody that went through my and others' classes, she was a tough teacher. like half of the people become utheycome up to me and they says in your mother's sixth-grade class and it changed me forever. [laughter] than the other half it was the most terrifying experience of my life. but she had high standards i must say you definitely when it came to writing and she did take some interest in my writing and

you could always do better with my mother as a writer and it's true you can always do better the more you work at it. in fact it is one of your big tips for law students. >> absolutely. the more you work the better it gets. you then went to high school in new york. when did you start thinking about law and did you ever think of being a judge? >> i didn't think about law that early. i don't remember as a kid having the feeling i want to be a

lawyer. i wanted to be a professional tennis player in all those things that just were not in the cards. but i went to law school for all the wrong reasons. when you talk to the students you just admit it and you try to get them to come to your school i was in the middle of talking to them and i just said something like you shouldn't go to law school just because you can't think of anything better to do or it will keep your options open for all these reasons and then i couldn't stop myself because i thought [inaudible] [laughter] i was a history major in college and i loved studying history.

i thought i would go on to graduate school and become a professor of some kind but then i did my senior thesis which is a great thing to have done and it taught me an incredible amount also what it was like to be a historian and i realized it wasn't for me and i did go to wal school but i was lucky because when i got there i realized right away that it was the place for me. the reason had to do with the combination of two things. on the one hand, i found it intellectually exciting. it was like a big puzzle and

some of them are those of you that love tax there is hope for you. at the same time, what was true is it was immediately clear that you could use this to make a difference in people's lives and that is what separated it from then on to become an academic historian or something like that which this wasn't only intellectually thrilling but you could take that and make a difference or do something that would help people that mattered. was that combination that made me realize okay this was the right move. i'm glad i'm here.

at that point i'm going to ask did you ever think you would be the dean at harvard? in terms of how many women in your class. >> i went to law school in the mid-1980s and graduated in 86 and by that point about 40% were women. i think everything had happened between the early 70s were made 70s and when i started it have taken a huge leap upwards but there were still very few professors and it wasn't until i think the first year i professor

became the dean of the school but there were a lot of women students. >> were there any particular challenges when interfaced when you were in law? .. note >> >> then there were so few

women in your class the and when you got out they were star students laugh firms did not want to hire the edward judges did not want to hire them or that clerks and the doors were shutting in their faces so there really had to make their own way so they created these absolutely brilliant careers that they made it up on the fly how they would get around the fact of all the standard employees said not interested. and that was not true by the time we came around by then the judges wanted you to be there clerk can never faced that kind of discrimination

and i didn't because of the incredible work and efforts that justice ginsburg and justice o'connor made. >> of course, that applied to me as well. for. >> [laughter] >> i know that. i did not mean to. >> but you mention opportunities because a lot did want to go onto public interest in and the path is to go right after they graduate from law school but you clerked for the d.c. circuit and you had a great fortune to clerk for justice marshall so what did in mean to clerk for those extraordinary and greg. >> but clerking in general is the great thing to do it

is a for everybody but it gives a sense of how the law works a different sense than what you have from law school and like me you have the chance to learn at the seat of people who of had terrific and exciting careers of one to talk more about those two people especially about justice marshall but he becomes a much better writer as a result and and you learn a law about how to actually make decisions which after just going through three years of reading but then to see how they make decisions was eye opening combat least it was for me and then my

legal analytics ken skills get better writing skills got better but then i clerked for the 10 most amazing human beings although he died just this past summer i have been thinking about him all what but he worked incredibly high level branches of government. >> that was the only one voice. >> and then served as counsel to the president for president clinton and was a judge congress judge then counsel to the president and you learn so much about how government works, what you can expect of congress and the administrative agencies just an enormous amount of real world knowledge about

government that he brought to his work because he judged on the d.c. area -- d.c. circuit and so much of their docket is about how government works and what those agency actions. but i also just learned when he was such a wonderful person and open and generous with a huge charge -- heart. and a wonderful mentor. i learned a law from him personally. justice marshall was one of the greatest years of my life if you can say to young lawyer dream of one year

long experience you cannot do better than that. you are clean 81 negative clerking with the supreme court he go to law school, you have read all of these decisions then you are there and interacting with the people's laugh written these decisions with legal issues and interesting issues but then i thought everybody should be envious

when into telling stories and he was funny make you laugh, make you cry believable stories about his life his childhood, his time in college if and law school vidal the different kinds of work if he did comment trial work been crisscrossing the south and era of jim crow you could not go off into a restaurant use the bathroom african-american client was on trial for a crime he did not commit in trenton and all white jury and incredible stories about

that era i felt was getting in american history lesson and also found a lawyer can do justice to of course, icahn never deal with the way justice marshall did it but just to be in his presence to soak the up enormously important. >> is there a take away from him quick. >> i think you have to be owned person i don't think what would he do because he was a different person added different time but i think for everybody judges or lawyers you cannot have a better one for.

>> to join in the university of chicago if but now president obama did you have much interaction greg. >> not really i knew him little bit but he had just carted teaching when i left. the only thing i remember actually he was teaching as an adjunct and he was practicing law and they're really wanted to hire him been decided he had better things to do. [laughter] but i remember a recruiting dinner that we had so i got to know him a very little bit but not very much.

>> with that experience you were faculty then left fan joint question like that is how i got to the clinton white house had decided to go into teaching a loved teaching was happy being a at the university of chicago which is a great place but the judge decided to leave his position on the bench to work for click president clinton and said. >> guest: to complex care it was a good time for me i had just gotten 10 the year and he gave and next thing which was about an exciting opportunity issue control for spirit and then to work on areas like welfare reform and those ever in the public interest to demonstrate pet you can have that kind of passion to work in other areas it doesn't have to be

a public interest entity. >> that's for sure and government does important things sometimes and makes their lives worse or better for me. you could not pick up place site think to get more done than if you are in the white house. and i had a great time done was a lawyer for part of it and policy for part of it i started as counsel to the president he asked me to work for him so i did lawyer stuff then 18 months and i got the opportunity to switchover to do policy work for and that was new for me violate the ability to do

new and different if things a was offered this opportunity asat i donald felt these issues of health care for immigration for welfare reform. end of spending enormous amounts of time pdf going over tobacco regulation would. the person who gave me the opportunity said you will learn and i did. it was a fun time. >> got you think there is value in knowing when to say yes to put your foot out there to make a change? >> i totally think that. when people ask for advice i would say laugh students in-between our to risk averse. everybody else does this so i do to.

i'm sorry that isn't my plan. ended doesn't include that and i found the best opportunities are the ones you did not expect them a huge believer in serendipity to think why young people ought to do is keep their eyes open for opportunities to say that sounds like a place i could make a difference. and not sure where it goes mobile will try it. but it might open up to a

new path by which we never expected and that would be terrific of all the things i have done in my life. >> you went to harvard after leaving the lighthouse was that in your plan? >> >> when you went to harvard there was a split in the faculty you were known as the unifier. in the public space everybody is not aligned so what can you share with us how you got the reputation as a unifier to move the faculty for word? >> is important to talk to everybody when i first

became there and harder it is a very large faculty and went to every single faculty member i sat down with them and have lunch or dinner one-on-one and said tell me about your concerns and how you think this place could be made better. it turns out just by listening you can get allied done. toussaint not sure want to go down that path. to say that you will understand them and bringing people together to spend time and energy to make people feel that they are being heard. >> does that help you on the supreme court in? >> idol they get translates.

[laughter] i do think i am a good listener. but i think i might listen pretty well. and that is pretty much everyplace. it is important to and in the court, we're all sitting around the table to figure out what we're saying and why. and try to figure out to reach consensus but to really listen to people but to put yourselves in their shoes to see the world from their perspective is

important to do. >> even though i have convictions and opinions nobody ever accused me of not knowing what i think but at the same time important 20 stand with other people think and why in order to make progress. the ability to put yourself in somebody shoes is what people should cultivated. that is an important gift and life. >> so you made the campus more user-friendly and i want to talk about during

your tenure you said it would be a requirement? >> >> you put more emphasis on that. >> was really important to have the best support we could for public-service work sordid put a law of emphasis on that. there was an enormous number of students doing the pro bono work and that imaginary requirement was 40 hours there were some doing thousands of hours. the mostly thought that was a good thing and i tried to increase it is hard as a student it is hard to find

jobs, it isn't in the same season, or big law firms and you are still looking but then financially it is difficult so to provide as much support as you can, of financial support. >> >> but some type of loan assistance program for those who do public-interest jobs during the summer to have a really good office to match people with employers. now it is easier for the loss school than others now harvard is a pretty wealthy place sensibility for those who try to do this m places

that don't have as much money but it is super important that they put a law of emphasis support for the public-interest work that the students do. >> do have that message. >> there is other advice that you have. one of them is the peers can teach as much as the professors nobody has a monopoly on the truth. >> ru reading my speeches? [laughter] i have. [laughter] >> can you share that advice , many are in the

audience? >> most important i think here i am trying to talk to people who try to find jobs but with career advice do what strikes you as meaningful and important and exciting and fun for i want to have the kind of job where you wake up every morning and you are eager to go to work because you think the work is challenging and it has some meaning. sometimes out will involve to take risks but to find what will silly with that sense of excitement is the key thing if you don't find

that the first time keep trying. some people go to law school in no exactly what they want to do but keep looking until it filled issue with the sense of purpose and that makes it fun to go to work everyday. >> and then you became the first female solicitor general that was exciting. >> it was the also scary. [laughter] >> i found until this job, which is the rest of my life, . [laughter] it is good that i like the job. [laughter] because it is the rest of my life. [laughter] but before that i moved around a law. i hadn't done a job more than six years.

i like that. not everybody does some people find one thing and that is what they want to deal for the rest of their life. that is great if that is the kind of person that you are. but for me and feel like i negative steep learning curve so we start something new and new and then it is time to go find something else where everything is new and exciting again. that is what i felt that the learning curve was vertical that wasn't much of the curve. [laughter] and i never argued in the appellate court before.

now you are arguing that the supreme court. >> candor first case was a cinch united. [laughter] that was scary. [laughter] it was the real argument it had been argued previously by the deputy solicitor general and actually he had argued the case literally day after a was confirmed and had gone to the office of solicitor general we were waiting and waiting for the case to come down finally the very last day the court said we want to set the case for real argument in september and the court never meets in september and rewind the parties to focus on these issues whether the court should overrule

campaign finance. so the writing was a little bit on the wall blackout - - the court was about to overturn the president -- president to have the regulation of that issue but whenever i got really really nervous silence day probably they'll ready made up their minds but it was pretty nerve wracking. i knew there'd be a law of people watching and my first argument. i worked to merely super hard. ahead of great fortune to have incredible people amount to me. one thing about choosing three were kyushu's people who are great lawyers assuming you are doing a law

job the people that you can lock the barn from -- learn from. the solicitor general's office they had terrifically years and felt there was learning all the time they gave me great advice about how to appear before the supreme court and how to argue so i did it second results is what you thought? [laughter] i lost by exactly the vote that i thought but that all year was a great experience i've learned a law justice marshall was the solicitor general a remember he said go up to the podium and for

him if gsa iamb thurgood marshall represented is states of america is stunning. it is for him that was not true of me. law of women have said that. but, still that is fantastic to go up to the supreme court denies states to say i represent united states of america on extremely important legal issues. >> of course, that was the job you had for your. >> i would have liked to have had that for longer. >> it's not like you can say callback and if you years laugh laugh. >> kea were confirmed in record time you had your

hearing june 28 confirmed august 6. >> it was really good time. second felt like it took forever. yes, it was great that happened so quickly. >> there was a law to do anything pretty much every senator 757 officers at the same time you were trying to prepare for your confirmation hearings there was a law. >> >> it didn't mind the process. >> there is one pending right now also you're not in the same time frame. so now the court is left for / four with is the impact? >> there is a reason why

courts to not usually have an even number of members they're adjusting is because if you had even number you have the possibility of a tie and that doesn't help anybody presumably were they do business to decide the cases most of the cases we take means there is a lack of uniformity for korea of a person one pace place subject to a different law than the person in another place and that is bad for federal law to apply differently in different parts of the country. valley make sure federal law is uniform even more than that is what the court does.

and we have to be in a position to do that we work real hard since justice scalia's passing we have worked hard to reach agreement we have not done the and very many cases and give credit to the chief justice and my colleagues as well, but still, there are times we cannot reach agreement and if you can, that is serious. sometimes even though be reached agreement that is only by every characterizing the issue in doubt way that really isn't the issue that they needed decided maybe we've massage it to decide a different question and nobody cares about. [laughter]

when the issue that they do care about and needed decided is unresolved. but that is a problem. a think the court has done a great job on the sleek really trying to make it work. i think the chief justice is incredible amount of credit for that. but there is a reason why courts have allied members to make sure they can reach decisions for all the cases that need decided and all the issues for. >> so go back to when your buddy was on the court and there were a number of five / four decisions which was about 20% so with all the different chief justices' still the same percentage.

>> it is something like that. people think that is all we do is reach the five / four decision but it isn't. there are some that we reached unanimously or lopsided. but there are some which previously were five / four now have the possibility to me four / four that is an issue. >> when you are there how does that affect your relationship. >> idol think honestly that it does you would like to william very competitive anybody who knows me would tell you so there are times when we come back from one conference i am ready to go

put my fist through the wall but justice scalia actually was my buddy and he would say if you take it personally you shouldn't be in this job that is absolutely right. first fed because for strategic reasons there be the next case in the next case and the next case after that. you better have continuing good relationships with your colleagues putting strategy aside, the fact of the matter is these four are people who disagree but they're working hard they are approaching the matter in good faith and deeply committed to their view of the law and the constitution and you can forget they are trying to get right just as much as you are. sometimes you will disagree but you all try to do the same thing which this to

interpret and apply the law as best you can. >> in terms of the voting process, you vote last quick. >> i do. >> you don't have a choice you like that? give me your thoughts. >> we sit around a big table with assigned seats increase speak in order seniority down to what i am is the junior justice we all speak and we vote they can change in a single conference period overtime but still at the time it comes to me all of my colleagues have tentatively voted. >> it is better to be number

nine than number seven or eight or six because you do have the ability to listen to everybody to sometimes you can say this is what i hear and maybe there is a way we can reach agreement. sometimes it is like a drumroll. [laughter] the especially if it is four / four what will you say? for it is better but honestly if you could choose u.s. issues to be some of the senior justices because they set the table for everything else. >> the senior justice in and the majority makes the assignment usually the

senior justice makes the assignment. >> so just turning to opinions we know they like to write and that is or that began so what is your goal with the opinion writing? sometimes it isn't always the clearest laugh laugh so what is your philosophy. >> can be incredibly complicated and not come intuitive i try very hard to make a readable and understandable by ordinary people but those who will put in the time and effort and energy to read an opinion i hope i will be

able to be understood you don't want to dump that down too much not act a second grade level the past be serious c. never want to oversimplify but where i can write something bred not writing at the level of the complexity of that material but i managed to achieve both claire and complex things of that is what i try to do. that takes a law of pork the city more editing you do the better a get the really believe that with a legal right thing it is hard when you try to express in a way people can understand. so why spend a law of time and thinking about that

thing and not just that you should be able to a understand but what i'm trying to do is figure out why we've reached a result and if i can tell story in a way to say that's right that is why we should have reached that result might do feel that here is my story why the court was right or wrong to reach that decision if i really wanted to move people, i get it. if you do that via analogy your hypothetical, there are different techniques to get people to say why this is so right off or so wrong. five.

>> and with the law students there are page limits do you think moyers have to write to the end of the page limit brecht's if they pick up a brief and it is not i am happy because we think the only reason it goes to the and is because they were trying to get to the and. why do that? i think they are positively inclined to the briefs that don't necessarily take every word that is allowed to them >> less is more. >> if i tell my clerks you have a seven page lament -- and learned they will say it is hard to knock it down to

seven pages i say then bank about what is important that is in bad thing to think about. >> q have other interest lawyer rather as to be a spokesperson for the law clerk in the cafeteria greg. >> so when you talk about you did these important things and promoted public interest but honestly if you read or ask a typical harvard lost in what is the best thing the dean did they would say free coffee. [laughter] when i got to the court one of the things that goes with the junior justice roll it is you serve on doc cafeteria committee i think

it is a form of hazing. [laughter] the chief justice thinks you're probably hot stuff will put you on the cafeteria committee so based upon my experience is that this is a good opportunity because one of the things i learned is you can do a law. so i did a little survey what people wanted most of what they wanted was a frozen yogurt machine. [laughter] so i got to a frozen yogurt machine and to write opinions and this is nice but i am frozen yogurt justice. [laughter] [applause] according to justice

ginsberg you also have the best jab and prostatic. >> one of the things things, actually i am not negative yeah jovanovich of exercise. [laughter] i find it boring but the trader has got me into boxing and kick boxing which is fantastic and i love it. it is great exercise. >> curious to play basketball. >> last week went down to louisville kentucky to the of franchise law school and the things that the town that is famous for, i did

some events that the law school they gave me a gift at the end it was the best gift i have never gotten the went to the boxing gloves from of, and all the and now i have mohamad of the boxing gloves. [laughter] >> as we wrap up. >> there are so many more questions and think we covered most of them. so what are your final words , not final final for. [laughter] what comment would deal like to say or what 81 your

legacy to beat greg. >> i will leave that to other people. to the historians and the writers what is important for me is just that negative my all and work as hard as icahn to make sure in every case dyad gotten their right . to the degree that i feel it is necessary and there were cruelly hard on my opinion for the majorities in defense. then i think the legacy will take care of itself just to work hard to set high standards in terms of the

quality what people say later that they will say later. >> there is a piece of advice? denied justice stevens said one of the things about this job like this, my career has been one of jumping around allot after five years stretches thinking about how to do a five-year job and over decades is a different experience. justice stevens has served 35 years to say every year he felt somewhat he was learning that year. at how even and done it was year number 28 he was learning new things they need new skills to there's