and on sundays, news makers, q&a, and prime minister's questions from the british house of commons. you can watch our programming and any time had c-span.org. >> night, chief justice john roberts on life on the supreme court. then a review of this year's supreme court decisions. then, the former secretary of state, lawrence eagleburger, a memorial service. chief justice john roberts was the featured speaker at the fourth circuit court of appeals annual conference. he remarked on the year's caseload and later took questions on the court and the possibility of can't -- cameras on the court. this runs about 50 minutes.

>> informal in the sense that the chief justice will be sitting in wingback chairs, in dark suits, before an audience, being televised on c-span. [laughter] it is my distinct pleasure to introduce the chief justice of the united states, the hon. john roberts jr. and the hon. j. harvey wilkinson. [applause] >> perfect.

good morning. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. thank you for getting up so early today. i am delighted to be here. one of the great privileges of being the chief justice is that you get to be the circuit justice for the fourth circuit, a tradition going back to john marshall. the role of the circuit justice has changed dramatically since his time. circuit justice is no longer have to ride circuits, that arduous process began in the reign of king henry ii. it came over to the colonies with the english system. over here, riding the circuit was much more arduous given the greater distances. the system fell into disuse

after the act of 1891, which set up the system of intermediate courts of appeals we have today. the practice formally ended 100 years ago this year with the judiciary act of 1911. we have worked out a pretty good deal. we will stop interfering directly with your work and you invite us to your conferences. [laughter] before i sit down and joined judge wilkinson, i want to make a few very brief remarks about the state of your supreme court. my colleagues and i heard 86 cases this year, selected from more than 8000 petitions for review. our argument calendar runs from october until april. we continued the practice of this year appearing more cases in the fall in we do the spring with the idea that would give us a chance to start working on decisions rather than having been distributed evenly throughout the year.

the jury is still out on whether we will continue that practice going forward. as of today, at the court has issued decisions in 82 of the 86 cases that were argued. we expect to release the last four on monday. when i say we expect to release them, you can probably deduced that the expectations are pretty high sense i am here. this term, the fourth circuit, despite its best efforts, did provide us with some interesting work. four cases from the fourth circuit -- two were confirmed and two were reversed. that is not bad at all since we reverse more cases than we confirm. the fourth circuit did better than average. in fact, i think it did better than the statistics suggest. i dissented in one of the cases are reversed on the fourth circuit. [laughter] i think you should look at it as a free work correctly decided and when it was not.

[laughter] there should be two very gloating district court judges that should be recognized for what you would call the "last laugh or more." they were reported by the fourth circuit, but then vindicated by the supreme court. both judges had the last laugh in their cases. again, on that last one, i dissented in the supreme court's decision to reverse the support -- reversed the fourth circuit. by the time the dust settles on monday, we will have about the same number of cases going into october than we had last year. last year we sell the retirement of our good friend and colleague justice john paul stevens after a remarkable 34 years of service on the supreme court and 45 years of government service in total. he served are court with

distinction and dedication. i can assure you that he is greatly missed by all at the court. while we had to say goodbye to one colleague, we had the great delight to welcome another. we are very delighted with our newest member, justice elena kagan. because of her prior service as solicitor general, she was very familiar with the court's work and hit the ground running offering seven opinions for the court this year. i think anyone who follows the work of the court will agree that her opinions are clear and careful and her questions from the brent -- from the bench very decisive. there is one area in particular where she has already proven to be a great success. a newly arrived justice at the court is appointed by me to the supreme court's cafeteria committee. [laughter] it is a way of bringing them back down to earth after the

excitement of confirmation and appointment. shortly after she arrived, justice kagan succeeded in getting a new frozen yogurt machine in the cafeteria. this accomplishment is significant since no one at the court can remember any of the prior justice is doing anything. -- justices doing anything. [laughter] i hope this is the last time i had to comment on our renovation projects. it broke down in 2004 and is nearly complete. it is still under budget, i am happy to say. we are in the process of removing the construction barriers around the property, putting in the landscaping, and when that is done, it will reclaim its status as one the most beautiful landmarks in washington. another point that was mentioned last night, we had to say goodbye to the director of the administrative office, jim duff.

he served the supreme court as an aide to chief justice warren burger and then as the administrative assistant to my predecessor, chief justice rehnquist, and most recently as the director of the administrative office. he has served with great distinction and will be greatly missed. i, in particular, will miss his wise counsel on an almost daily basis at the court. the supreme court, like the rest of the judiciary and the federal government, is facing increasingly difficult budget constraints. we at the court are finding ways to do more with less. under the recent budget agreement for fiscal year 2011, which began in october 2010, the court will operate under the same appropriation levels as the previous year. the judiciary will have a slight increase in funding to meet specific needs including the cost of defender services and

jury fees. i very much appreciate the efforts of the judges and administration -- administrative support staff of the fourth circuit in running a very efficient court system in the face of a growing body pit -- of a growing pocket. i will work to make sure that the courts have adequate funding to carry out their vital business. i am very grateful to the judges and administrative staff of the fourth circuit, my circuit, for the sacrifices they make for the good of the courts and to help sustain the will all live in the country. i am also grateful to the members of the bar for recognizing that they served not only plants, but also as officers of the court. now, i would like to turn to what i used to have to endure and what lawyers still endure, a grilling from judge wilkinson.

thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. chief, welcome to the fourth circuit. you are especially welcome. he wrote a great dissent. [laughter] it had nothing to do with the fact that it was my case that was reversed. it is a pleasure. it has been a difficult conference for us because virginia and south carolina have faced each other in the college world series. we will not inquire about the outcome of last night on a game. -- last night's game. it is a pleasure to have you here. i know i speak for the entire judiciary when i say how much we appreciate your leadership and sterling character and also the warmth and humor.

>> i like this discussion already. [laughter] >> judges of all persuasions are really appreciate your leadership that you are giving the judicial branch. it has been, i think, almost six years since you were confirmed in august of 2005. i was wondering if, looking back of the six years, is there any one thing that stands out? one opinion? one moment that, more than any other, stands out from the rest in those first six years? >> it is hard to pick just one. but if i had to, i would say it was a moment not on the bench.

i remember, and always will, the first time i've presided over the court. justice o'connor on my left and justice stevens on my right, both of whom have since retired, but i would say my most memorable moment was my first time in the conference. the work of the court is, in some respects, very public. the arguments or in public, open to anyone. our decisions are there for everyone to see, but the deliberations are private. even people who have been around the court do not have the sense of what goes on. i did not. i was going in to participate for the first time and was expected to get the discussion rolling. i was extraordinarily impressed by what went on. again, i did not know quite what to expect. the level of discussion, the level of analysis -- my

colleagues, of course, were prepared to present their views. the interaction between the justices was at an extraordinarily high level with a -- with inappropriate degree of collegiality, but also reflecting the fact that these folks came from different views and more interested in exploiting those views. in our conference room we had at one side of the table u.s. reports. people get up and pulled the books down and look at them. if they want to make a point or check a point -- i left extraordinarily impressed. i appreciated the great challenge of participating in the process. >> so many times the conferences are talked about as a cut and dried affair where people suggest a confirm or reverse. there's not much discussion.

there is a whole lot more interaction ban is otherwise known. >> it varies. some cases, but the time you have read the brief and that the arguments, it is cut and dry. even conflicts -- in some essences, those discussions are pretty clear what we think the right result is. we do not spend hours on every case, but others present more difficult issues, even when the outcome is clear. >> i have often wanted to ask you about the restrictions on judicial life. there are so many things that we cannot do, and that goes ee and for the chieftriply

justice. we have to steer clear of partisan activity. we have to be circumspect with the friends we can hang around with. particularly when they have cases before the court. we have to be model citizens, at least try to be, in so many ways. you and i are probably the only individuals in this room to have a dark suit and tie on on saturday morning. even if we wanted to, we cannot go out for a wild night on the town. [laughter] over the years, this monastic existence -- with all of these restrictions, does that began to bother you or wear on you a little bit? >> i was not actually known for

wild nights on the town before. [laughter] >> i was thinking hypothetically. >> whatever you think of the confirmation process, we have to focus a lot of wild nights. you know it is not as bad as all of that. i do not wear a dark suit and tie when i get to the soccer games on saturday mornings. i think a lot of less developed particular areas where our extracurricular activities are focused. a lot of times people do not know you are a judge. no, it has not bothered me. you get a great opportunity -- if you're going to have a wild night on the town, you have an opportunity to have it here at the greenbrier. [laughter] >> all of us get a lot of criticism about cases.

it obviously comes with the territory when you are chief justice. there is going to be a lot of criticism. i remember in politics it was satisfying to be able to fire back. if somebody said something you did not like, you're free to punch them back. but here in the judiciary, somebody can is characterized something or somebody can write in and say a first grader could write a better opinion than you did. i get those kind of letters. i hope you do not. i know you do not. i thought to myself, when i was a newspaper editor i get paid to say what i thought. when i was a judge, i get paid to shut up.

we are living a life of "no comment" in terms of the criticism that pours in. does it bother you never to be able to respond? >> first of all, a lot of the criticism comes from our colleagues. the answer is, no, it does not. what's your appreciate that citizens have the full right to criticize what we do and always have -- it is not a new phenomenon. your contribution to the debate is limited to the four corners of the opinion. it reflects your view of the law. if your not supposed to get into the partisan bickering. also, there is a real difference in terms of perspective. i think a lot of the criticism is focused on a particular moment.

judges have a different perspective. i am a little more worried, concern, were focused on what people think of might work in 20 years or 30 years or longer than that. the fact that there is a lot of back-and-forth in the immediate wake of the decision, we, as judges, had a different perspective. >> let's talk just a minute about what cleric's if we may. -- law clerics, if we may. they are undoubtedly the most intelligent and dedicated young men and women everywhere. yet, i think it would surprise the future leaders of our profession and the public to know that your chief assistant -- chief legal assistants are

20-something. maybe members of the public would say they do not have years and years of experience. many of them are out of law school. a clerkship is a couple of years. some are dismayed by how green and inexperienced they are. in the early 1970's, we had a constitutional challenge to a garnishment proceedings. we went in to discuss the proceeding. within a few minutes, as justice powell discovered that none of this court's knew anything about the mechanics of garnishment. the buried his face in his hands and said, "who are these people around me?" he was used to working with the junior partners and junior associates. does the greenness and a lack of

seasoning of the law clerks trouble you at all compared to the type of staffing you were used to? >> if it does not. i think it is a real plus. before i explain why, i want to say that it is a wonderful institution to have four very bright law students coming off of a court of appeals court ship in almost every case. they spent a year with you. you learn a lot about what is happening in the law school's, that level of the profession. you get a new perspective every year. then they go out into the profession either into public service, private practice, where working in a all departments -- law department. they also worked extremely hard.

they really do, for which i am grateful. i remember i told my current clerks when they were starting out -- they want to know when they are supposed to be here and all of that. i was told when i started working for judge friendly, he said he did not expect us to work every minute of every day. pete said we just said to be there when he was there. -- he said we just had to be there when he was there. i have the same rule. it is a real plus that they are "green," as he put it. the idea is for you and for me to learn about garnishment when making decisions. it reminds me when i was

clerking for justice rehnquist -- he had the 10 date role. i had the same role. your clerks have 10 days to do their work. it did not matter if it was the second version of marbury vs. madison -- they had 10 days. i remember going to justice rehnquist and saying i could do a better job on the draft if i could have another week. he said, john, the idea is not for you to do a better job, it is for me to do a better job. i think that i will stay in the process. i do not need a polished, final version. that might make it harder for me to make sure it is might work. they are extremely bright. i am absolutely delighted to have them with a four a year. i do not want them to get too familiar with the court were the work that we do because it is

supposed to be our work. >> i know you're court's work hard because there was a family member in your chambers to reported that -- as you know, columbus day is a federal holiday. they would try discreetly to find out whether you were going to be in on columbus day. should we come in on columbus day? i was told your response was, "you will have the rest of your life to take off on columbus day." [laughter] >> to be fair, it falls right in the middle of the first two weeks of the term. and memorial day falls right in the middle of the part where we are ready to head the decision is finalized. that is another reason i am sure they only work for one year. [laughter] >> you are at the end of a long term.

everybody deserves a chance to recharge. i think my recollection is right about this -- reporters were giving someone a hard time about the two months in the summer that he took off, went away from the court, and did not do anything. he gave up what i thought was a classic response. he said, "i can do twelvemonth's work in 10. i just cannot do it in 12." i thought, that is perfect. do you have some fun things you are looking forward to doing during the summer? some hobbies you do not have a chance to work on during the year? what are you going to be doing

to get completely away from a lot? >> hobbies -- after the last one, my favorite is sleeping. i look forward to doing more of that over the summer. it is nice to have a chance. people do not realize it is a very unusual feature of being on the supreme court that you are with eight colleagues and you do the same thing. the court of appeals, you work on different teams. district courts, you have different buckets. members of the bar, you have different responsibilities within your farm or your practice. but the nine of us, we read the same braes, we go over the same arguments, we go the same cases, we go over the same precedents -- i understand the justice's point. it is a little more intense. i love my colleagues greatly. it is nice to get away from each

other for a little while. of course, i want to emphasize, we do not take two months off. certain processes continue. we have to keep up with 1% of our cases. some things do come up in the middle of the term that we have to address. but, it obviously is time off. i do some teaching. i have a two-week course that i teach on the supreme court. i take my family with me so we have an enjoyable break. i'd like to catch up on some extracurricular reading that has nothing to do with the law. basically, i try to make up for the fact that there are weeks and months when you're not able to spend much time with the family. >> it is certainly well- deserved. i know that many members of our audience would love to ask you a question.

i think we should ask a member of the audience to come forward and asked the chief justice and question that has been on your mind. please do not inquire about the specifics of a particular case. you must have something -- this is your chance. this is your opportunity to ask the chief justice of the united states a question about the supreme court, or what ever is on your mind. >> mr. chief justice, good morning. i am from washington. there is a disturbing trend in washington to close the front doors to public buildings, most notably at the capitol and the national archives, and most recently at the court itself. people are now shunted to the basement. can you comment on that decision and indicate whether it may change one day? >> first of all, the doors are

not closed. they are open. people, tourists, and practitioners go through these doors. for security reasons, we determined it was not appropriate to allow people to come in. that is what is behind closure as some other places as well. it is a sad reality. but based on the information and studies we have received, we cannot in good conscience pretend there is no threat and carry on as usual. people do enter on the side. they go through our exhibits down there and come up to the great hall. we do have state of the our security there, not only for all unusual metal detector things, but also mechanical and biological agents. we are happy we are able to keep the door open so people