medical science can offer. swathed in bandages they maybe more than thankful for the escape from the hindenburg. members of the crew were not seriously injured housed in the officer's mess at the naval station. 13-year-old vernon france is the youngest survive and will before the department of commerce investigation board that calls commander as first witness. experts believe the exact calls will never be known will loom a he question mark that can never be forgotten. >> former supreme court justice sandra day o'connor was nominated by president reagan in 1981 and served on the court for 21 years before retiring in 2006. recently she and three current u.s. justices, ruth bader beginsberg, sonya sotomayor and

kagen shared storied and they talked about how life and work for women has changed over 30 years. the supreme court historical society and the freedom forum co-hosted this hour-long event. >> good evening, ladies and gentlemen, i'm greg joseph, and i'm delighted to welcome you to the society's celebration of the 30th anniversary of the first term of justice sandra day o'connor on the u.s. supreme

court. we are deeply honored to have with us this evening justice o'connor, justice ruth bader ginsburg, justice sonya sotomayor and justice elena kag agai kagen. this is the first time they've done this this evening. we want to thank jim duff, the ceo of the freedom forum and the freedom forum was making this magnificent space available to us at the museum this evening. jim has a history with the supreme court historical society dating back to his time as administrative assistant to chief justice rehnquist and before that chief justice berger. i also want to thank society president amare tus frank joenz

to support the events this evening. frank was a distinguished president from 2002 and 2008 and only because of illness isn't with us this evening. our panel this evening consists of the four women to date served on the united states supreme court. even to summarize each of their careers with highlights would take far too long, so i'll be very brief. justice sandra day o'connor was nominated to the court by president ronald reagan on july 7th, 1981 and she was confirmed by the senate on september 22 t2, 1981. she retired on january 31, 2006. justice ruth bader ginsburg was appointed to the court by president william clinton on june 14th, 1993. she was appointed and confirmed

by the senate and assumed her role on august 10th, 1993. justice sonya sotomayor was appointed by president barack obama on may 26, 2009 and assumed her position on august 8th, 2009. the following year justice elena kagem by president barack obama on may 10th, 2010 and assumed her position on august 7th, 2010. we are honored and grateful to bring all of them together to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the ground-breaking tenure as it began of justice sandra day o'connor. i'd ask everyone to turn off cell phones and blackberries, and with that i turn the program over to jim duff. thanks very much, jim. >> thank you very much, greg. we're delighted that the supreme court historical soeciety is having this celebration of justice o'connor's 30th

anniversary of her appointment to the supreme court here at the museum. we're very honored you're here with us this eenvening, justice o'connor. we're pleased and honorred you're here with us on a special night. it's all the more special because it's the fourth anniversary of the opening of the museum, so we couldn't have done better to celebrate that i would say. we have -- we don't have a kwoer r quorum but enough to grant circa tonight. we'll move on to some softer questions, i think. justice o'connor, your nomination as the first woman to serve on the supreme court of the united states 30 years ago was certainly historic. it was also a very closely guarded secret. william french smith writes in his memoirs of hiding you and of

a clandestine meeting at dupont circle in front of a drugstore. >> he wanted to get me down to the white house to meet with the president. he had asked me to come back here and meet with some of the president's close advisers, which i did. he had rented hotel space someplace downtown so that we could meet that day, and members of his cabinet, several of them, had come. they were able to ask questions. so then at the end of the day he said, and the president would like to see you at the white house this afternoon. i'd never been to the white house. i'd never seen it. i didn't know where it was. i said, well, where is it? >> and he said, well, i can explain it to you, but he said, i'll tell you what i'll do. i'll ask my secretary to pick you up, and she has an old green

chevrolet. she'll pick you up on dupont circle if you're out there. i had a meeting of dupont circle at an organization that i belong. here came the old green car, and his secretary picked me up and drove me down to the white house. we were admitted, and we made our way in due course to the oval office. it's so small. i mean, it's such a shock to get in there. you think, oh, my gosh. this is the white house. it's the president's office. it's this tiny little oval place. so we the sat down and talked, and it was very pleasant. he was a man very easy to talk to. >> yes, yes. that's great. >> that's how it started. >> these days we see lists emerge and there's not so much secrecy around it. do you think it's more difficult to keep a psych rhett as to who is being considered or a different approach?

>> i'm been touring the museum today. they can tell you. i don't think you can keep any secrets in washington myself. i think that's impossible. >> was it a goal of yours to become a justice? >> goodness no. it certainly was not. and i wasn't sure what i ought to do, because it's all right to be the first to do something, but i didn't want to be the last woman on the supreme court. >> thank goodness for that. >> if i took the job and did a lousy job, it would take a long time to get another one. so it made me very nervous about it. >> you paved the way for some great justices. when did you first think about it? was it -- >> when he sent ken starr and some other people out to arizona to talk to me. they wouldn't say what it was for, and so it could have been

some cabinet post or something like that. they wouldn't tell me. and we had some nice visits, but they've done a lot of homework out there. they've gone through all my papers, and i had served in all three branches of arizona's government, so i had a big paper trail they had to go through, i guess. >> who were your role models? >> for what? >> you were aa trailblazer, so i guess you are the role model for everyone else, i suppose. justice ginsburg, where were you in your career when justice o'connor was appointed, and what did it -- did it have special meaning for you at that point in your career? >> it was a moment that -- one of those few in life that you remember exactly where you were and how you felt. i had been on the d.c. circuit for exactly one year.

i was driving home, turned on the news, and the news was sandra day o'connor. i was about to cheer, but no one would hear me. and then i found out what i could about this great lady, including what good lunches she made when ken starr and whoever came with him. visited her in phoenix. >> yes. >> and i read -- well, i knew that she'd been the head of the senate in arizona and on a trial court and intermediate appellate court. you had been to a conference on federalism in william & mary. >> yes. and i had gone to a couple of those meetings with people from

the british isles, lawyers and judges. remember those that warren berger initiated? i've gone to a couple of those. but i certainly wasn't well-known in the judicial community of the nation. >> justice sotomayor, where were you in your career? >> i was almost at the beginning. my second year after graduating from law school, two years after i graduated in the d.a.'s office in manhattan. and i remember having conversations at lunchtime in that awful yale cafeteria talking about how long it would take for a woman to be appointed to the supreme court. and there were bets being taken whether it would happen in our lifetime or not. so the unlikelihood or the fact that it was still something we

weren't sure of bespeaks how historic it became, that only two years later sandra was appointed. >> what did it mean to you at that time in your career? >> well, in law school there were no women on the supreme court. there was no woman on the court of appeals in my state of new york. most large law firms that at the time were a few hundred lawyers -- today they're thousands, but back then there was still a number of them that had no women lawyers whatsoever. so for us in my time at law school, the doors were opening, but they were very, very small openings. and so the idea that this barrier had been reached so quickly was sort of an inspiration to think that more could come. and certainly that opportunities for us would grow. and so they obviously have

because ruth followed, took too long, elena and i followed shortly thereafter. >> this is fabulous to have all these women on the court. >> fabulous indeed. [ applause ] >> ruth, i will say for president reagan, when he was campaigning to be president, he didn't think he was doing too well with the female votes. he started making statements about if i'm elected president, i would like to put a woman, a qualified woman on the supreme court. and he made enough of those statements that then about four months after he had become president, potter stewart, justice stewart retired, and there he was faced with what to do. >> with what he said. well, he was a man of his word. justice, where were you in your

career when justice o'connor was appointed. >> i was two years shy of going to law school. hate to rub it in, you know. but even i knew enough to be impressed. i had just graduated from college, actually, and i remember the announcement and thinking, what a stunning thing. >> did it have particular meaning to you? you thought at that time about going to law school and perhaps becoming a judge or justice? >> i was thinking about it. it was one of the things that i was mulling over, but i remember the announcement and feeling very, very inspired about it. >> you clerked for justice marshall when justice o'connor was on the bench. >> true. >> what was that -- was that of particular meaning to you to justice o'connor? >> she was aa formidable person, even a clerk know how formidable justice o'connor was. >> well, i hope not. >> you're going to tell your

joke about your caps? >> about what? >> the cast. >> okay. here's my justice o'connor joke from when i was a clerk. so justice o'connor founded one of justice o'connor's achievement was she founded an exercise group. she likes to have women clerks come to the exercise group. >> i did, yeah. >> and i failed to come to the exercise group. >> i noticed. >> well, that's the story, in fact. i used to play basketball instead. i used to play basketball. >> that's okay. >> i didn't go to the exercise group. one day i tore something in my leg playing basketball, and i was on crutches for a few weeks. the day after this happened, i was on crutches walking down the hallw hallway, and justice o'connor was walking the other way and she stopped and said what

happened? i said i tore whatever i tore playing basketball. she sadly shook her head and she said, it wouldn't have happened in exercise class. >> and i'm sure that's true. >> elena, i was a failure, too, because a senator encouraged me to attend the class. it's at 8:00 in the morning. as everyone knows, i'm a night person. >> i told her the same thing. >> i haven't done too well getting them to class. i still have my class. it's still going on, and i went this morning as a matter of fact at 8:00 a.m. it was good. that meant a the lot to me, to have that class. that just really mattered. in all the years i was in arizona, i had an early morning exercise class. >> you were a trailblazer, in many ways, and that exercise

class at the supreme court was one of the first in that regard. what are you doing for exercise now? >> i go to my exercise class. what do you mean? >> are you still playing golf? >> yeah, once in a while. i'm not very good, and that's not much exercise, you know. >> it is for me. i do a lot of walking. how do you enroll in that? maybe it's enlist? >> see me. i'll get you in. i got justice breyer up there a few times, but he didn't want to be the only man up there. if if you join, too, maybe we could get it going again. >> president reagan signed your nomination to the court on august 19th, 1981, and you were confirmed by the senate on september 21st, 1981 by a vote of 99-0. you took your oath on september 25th, 1981. we certainly have seen remarkable changes in the appointment and confirmation process since then.

do you have any observations about the current state of the nomination process and what it's -- >> well, it's less likely to be 99-0, i think. there seems to be a little more controversy than there was at that time. at the time i went on, i think it was expected that whoever was the incumbent president would fill a vacancy on the court. if she didn't have horns and look to frightening, they'd confirm the nomination. i think it's changed a little bit since then. i'm sorry to say. >> and justice ginsburg, you've had more recent experiences with it. do you have any observations -- justice sotomayor and justice kagan, too, do you have observations to make now? now you're safe on the court. you can make observations about the process. >> it was a much different process for sonia and elena than

it was for me, because i was the beneficiary of the senate judiciary committee's embarrassment over the nomination of justice thomas, and they wanted to make sure that they were civil. they wanted to make sure that there were women on the judiciary committee. so my hearing, it was rather dull. and the vote wasn't 99, but it was close. it was 96-3. and the justice breyer was also a beneficiary of that atmosphere. i mean, the senate back in 1993 and '94 was truly bipartisan. senator hatch was, i think, my biggest supporter on the committee. so i wish we could get back to the way it was in those years. >> what about your experience, justice sotomayor? >> i think that what we have

fallen prey to is the public's expectation that there are answers to every question. that a hearing is going place where a prospective judge is going to say yea or nay to whatever social issue and outcome an individual member of the public believes in. i think that so long as that expectation continues to be fed by both the pundits who examine our records routinely about how we're going to vote and certain issues or not, that we're never going to satisfy anybody with the system as it currently exists because the reality is if what you're attempting to do is to get clear answers to how we're going to rule on cases that are coming before the court, i think you'd better be

suspicious if you have a no, ma'am knee whobsds this is a way i'm voting because it will suggest that person is coming in with a pre made up mind and unwillingness to listen. having said that, i at least found that my personal meetings with the senators were very civil by and large. and to that extent, it was easier to deal with the sort of public grilling that i received. and knowing that it was each of us playing our role. for purposes that i wish were different, but i don't know that we're going to be able to satisfy people so long as the expectation of what they're expecting from the process remains the same. >> justin kagan, do you have? >> there's no doubt the two of us experienced a different

process. i remember thinking at one point during the process, people were asking me of all the things justice ginsburg wrote. i remember thinking i'm being asked as much things as she was asked. isn't there enough that i have to answer for? i wish there were more bipartisanship in the current process, but that's it. i agree with justice sotomayor that senators of both political parties i felt treated me fairly and respectfully and it's just a shame that it's come to a pass where people, republicans feel as though they can vote for the nominees of democratic presidents and vice versa. >> this may be more of an issue with appellate courts, but do you think it would be helpful if the senate imposed a rule on itself of a time frame to vote up or down on a nominee because

some of the appellate and district court nominees drag on for over a year in the nomination process. >> i think you're right that it is a problem for the courts of appeals. you had experience with that. how many years between your nomination? >> it was nothing, really and i don't think elena's either. >> i mean for the second circuit. >> it was 22 months. >> yeah. because a supreme court nominee is is going to be short. it's going to get top priority and go through in a matter of weeks. it's been the case for some time that you can be nominated to a court of appeals and wait mon s months. >> i had 18 for the district court. some weeks can be terribly belong. >> if they would just put a time

limit on themselves and vote up or down, that would be helpful, it seems. justice oo'connor, when you arrived, i recall an atmosphere of civility of justice powell and others and it continues certainly to this day. i know justice thomas just spoke last week at the university of kentucky, which won the national basketball championship recently. >> oh, you noticed. >> we got told just as we came in. >> any comment that he's never hard a harsh word spoken in conference in which the nine justices meet. how important is civility in the work of a court and it's a small

group. it's important that everyone be polite and kind and pleasantn't to each other. you have to disagree on the merits of things. but you can disagree agreeably and that very important and the court does well on that score, i think. >> how is it preserved when there's turnover on the court? i think claire cushman has written that justice white gave you his chambers to assist you. are this other ways in which -- >> i never knew there was a manual. i never got one. >> that's where all the secrets are. >> i'm finding out all these secrets. >> it was the internal operations within his chambers. >> oh, within his chambers. >> sent it to me in the d.c. circuit and he said, don't open this until you're confirmed.

but when you're confirmed, maybe it will be a little help. so my clerk's job every year is to update it and i gave my manual to sonia and elena when they came on board. so that was a tremendous help. there's wonderful traditions of the court, in resent times has been a strong attribute of it. do you think the other branches of government should emulate it? is that possible? or are they so different in structure? >> they're different. just have nine members of the court, so it's a small institution. and they live and work in quarters that cause them to see each other frequently and i just think it's very, very important that the relations remain cordial and friendly and

thoughtful and i think they have. i think we're lucky. >> there was a time when the senate was known as a gentleman's club when there was a great deal of cordiality. >> that's gone. >> if justice ginsburg will remember the other day about this conversation we had aboutsy tillty on the court, do you remember what you said, ruth? she said it's because we've had women for the last -- >> my guess is that that's especially true of justice o'connor. justice thomas once told me we have a tradition on the court where we eat lunch together after we hear arguments and have conference. so it ends up being 8 or 10 or

12 times a month. justice thomas once told me if ever he went a couple of days without going, justice o'connor would appear saying, clearance, why aren't you there? lunchtime. you encouraged everybody to participate in those kinds of communal activities and i think that's very important. >> particular help to you when you joined the court? >> yes. my adviser, big sister, she told me a little bit, just enough to get by in the early days, then i came to her with a problem when the chief made assignments in my first sitting. the legend that the junior justice gets an easy, unanimous

case. >> yeah. that's right. >> but the old chief gave me a miserable case in which the court had divided 6-3. so i went to sandra thinking that you would persuade her, good friend, to revise the assignments. so i told her, ruth, you just do it. get it out before he makes the next set of assignments. and that's really her attitude towards life. does whatever needs to be done. >> when justice o'connor and you were on the court together, you were called justice o'connor on more than on