true of many other branches of law where the appellate system has become so sluggish, so slow, that often by the time a question finally gets resolved, in an appellate court, particularly the supreme court, the practical utility of the resolution is obsolete, because life has been moving along much faster underneath. is that another dimension of this problem? >> it is certainly a problem. again, quo tote -- to quote winston churchill, it is a terrible system. it is just better than any other one. i met with the brazilian supreme court. they have just met with the united states supreme court less than a month ago to deal with their issues. in brazil, every matter that comes before the supreme court of brazil, they had 80,000 cases

last year, 80,000, obviously, no justice. you cannot have a system that wants to review 80,000 cases. i do think our appellate system could use some tweaking, but by and large, the florida -- i am not sure i agree with that -- almost certainly respected -- the florida supreme court's motto is, you'll appreciate this, i will not give you the latin version, but the translation is "soon enough, if correct." that is the actual motto. sometimes soon enough is not soon enough. you are correct. as you know, professor, the supreme court of the united states takes such few cases that usually the intermediary court

decision is the final one. we have to fill the bench. it is going to be worse every day if we have an empty federal bench that cannot function. on the 11th circuit today, we have two vacancies. >> another dimension, it has been called to mind in this question that justice sotomayor was cross-examined in a rather aggressive way concerning her statement that a woman, i think she went on to say hispanic woman -- >> wise latina. >> you are running way ahead of me. could understand a lot of things much better than people, certainly such as i, and perhaps

even you. so we are talking both about, so to speak on ethnic and cultural background and gender. they are affecting the way people understand what justice is. >> well, she -- i thought she answered the question pretty well. she got confirmed. the fact is that at the same time, the justice alito understands some of those cultural issues. it is interesting. the supreme court of the united states today has no protestants on the supreme court. isn't that interesting? we basically have catholics and jews. >> i have been very worried about that, i will tell you. [laughter] >> i mentioned it because i

thought it was keeping you up at night. the fact is that i have no doubts that they each will do what they said in their nomination, which is they would apply the law, and what justice roberts said is really probably a similar statement. judges are supposed to call balls and strikes. that does not mean that they don't understand -- as a matter of fact, why do you have a diverse jury? the appellate court is just another type of jury, right? the supreme court is a very different kind of jury because the supreme court, and having only had one case before them, i learned very quickly that president -- precedent is not as important as the justices, who will decide what the law is.

they will change what the lot is if they get a majority of their sisters and brothers to go along with it. to have a jury made up of diverse cultural views and understanding only makes us a stronger society. so i think -- i personally think it is a good thing. i do not think you ever separate your life from what you do. your personal experiences -- some of the personal experiences i talked about tonight shaped my life, and i think they are important parts of the decision- making process in may, that they did not overwhelm -- but they do not overwhelm the legal obligations i have in the case. >> i am going to ask a different kind of question, which is -- do you see the difference between the idea of a constitutional democracy, which is a term you have used -- and a

constitutional republic? >> i really do not. i use them interchangeably. one of my favorites is ben franklin. when he left the constitutional convention, one of the people on the street and asked him what kind of government he had given them, and he said, "a republic, if you can keep it." i think in many ways, they are one in the same. frankly, there may be some differences that people at some level view it, but i view it as almost interchangeable words. >> speaking of which, the aba has recently given attention to the problem of lobbying. in particular, the concern that, speaking of republics, that people will have access to money -- businesses, but others

as well -- had higher voices whispering in the year -- can higher voices whispering in the year of congressman or more important, in the year of staff of congressman -- the ear of staff of congressman. do you think that is a serious problem? and what could they do about it? >> if you look at how the supreme court looks at even funding of judicial elections, which are meant to be different than legislative elections -- remember that we have two branches of government that the framers decided would be controlled by a majority vote. that is the executive and legislative. they did a pretty good job of keeping their fingers in the air, right? i think that people have a right to lobby. i think for people do not have

the same access as rich people. i think for people have a lot of things that they cannot do because of the resources they have available, but i think lobbying in general, as long as it is not anything that is secretive, and that is one of the big problems in lobbying -- the secret of aspects of it -- but as long as they do not violate the law, there is going to be lobbying. i think a bigger problem and one that i'm glad i have a couple of minutes to talk about, is the political action committees coming into states and targeting judges. that is a huge problem. look at what happened in iowa. you had a supreme -- you know about the judges that got removed? we do not know about that? ok, let me talk about that for a second year of two supreme court justices were removed by

the voters because they voted in a unanimous opinion based on the iowa constitution and the united states constitution on any issue involving gay rights. an anonymous political action committee comes in and takes one sentence out of an opinion of these judges who have been on the bench for years and years and years and defeats them, removes them at the polls and actually suggests that this is -- this was in the words of the organizer -- that this is a wake-up call to the judiciary. actually, it should be a wake-up call to all americans that we have a serious problem. we should not allow anonymous pac's to come into states ended the judges based on one sentence is opinion. they are going to have one, let

them registered and let them decide -- let the people decide whether or not those judges acted in a way that was consistent with the constitution. as a result of that, one of the things i have asked, and this will be one of the most interesting debates in the next three weeks in toronto, is the judicial recusal coming before congress. i think the republican party versus white, which is the case that said that judges have first amendment rights -- historically, the judicial code said judges are not supposed to comment about how they would rule in a certain case, and they have a very strict code of conduct. republican party versus white, decided by the united states supreme court, said that judges have first amendment rights, so they can say anything they want. the point is that if a judge says, "i'm going to rule for or against an abortion issue," without hearing the evidence

during the course of the campaign, should that judge be disqualified? by virtue of those statements. and also, if a judge is to be reduced, that is the most difficult thing that a trial lawyer ever has to do. i will tell you as a practicing trial lawyer, you will stay up nights and nights and nights before you will ever see to reduce a judge. it is very serious. >> a few people in the audience might be helped if you would define refusal. >> refusal is when you say to a court, "you cannot be fair." this is the person who is going to judge your case and your client's case. you then write a motion that explains why you think this judge cannot be fair. if you do not think that is a tough decision -- it is a tough decision on a lot of bases. your client's affidavits have to be filed. you should never file something like that.

it is a very serious document. all documents may be serious, but there's nothing as or more serious than saying to a judge, "you cannot beat their peak at one of the things we are suggesting, for example, and historically, who do you think rules on that? the judge who you are saying cannot be fair. [laughter] ok, this is common sense. something sometimes is lost in the law, as dickens pointed out many years ago. but we are suggesting that somebody other than that judge, another judge, look at that and determine whether it is facially sufficient. because that is the standard. we are looking at issues like in florida. you get -- get $500 to a judge, that is okay, but if you give more than that, that judge cannot hear your case. if you are, let's say, the campaign manager for a judge --

because we have elections -- if anybody's interested -- let me just finish that. if you are a campaign manager, he cannot appear before that judge. the aba spent two years on a report called justice in jeopardy, which is online, and it talks about how judges are elected in every single state. one of the document you might be interested in because i understand you have had vigorous talks about this recently is immigration. the aba just issued several months ago the most comprehensive immigration reform report in the last two decades. it contains 10,000 pro bono lawyer hours of some of the best law firms in america. part of the frustration that exists regarding immigration -- and i was just at a white house meeting monday and tuesday of this week on this issue -- it relates to the anchor -- the anger people have saying that is

broken and we cannot fix it and there's nothing we can do. that is wrong. we have an ability to fix the problem. we should fix the problem. the aba rendered a report that it will continue to act as a resource in fixing the problem. these are things they have online if you are interested. suddenly, you could visit our website feared by the way, if we do not get to your question, i will see you out back. happy to talk to you about anything you want to talk about. >> we should all remember that most of us are at least descendants of immigrants. one thing about justice in a different sense -- i have a question here that says that some constitutions -- and they mention the cuban one -- include health and literacy as basic

rights. should we think of those as basic rights? you will certainly realize that at least as to help, that is one of the key problems going on in the present debt ceiling controversy in washington. >> my favorite book just recently, and i tell you it is $9.95 on amazon, is president kennedy's book called "nation of immigrants." it was written in the early 1960's. it will take you a couple of hours to read it again. it is a fabulous book and makes you realize that nothing has changed in the last 50 years. he talks about why we are a nation of immigrants and why that has been the strength of america. so, yes, we are all a nation of immigrants. we should remember that in these debates.

but florida has an interesting process, something the all states should adopt, but every 20 years, a group of 30 citizens are awarded by the governor, the speaker of the house, the senate, supreme court, to rewrite florida's constitution, every line of it. it does not go to the legislature. all those pesky lobbyists out there do not get a chance to lobby one way or the other. goes right to the citizens of the state. took us two years to do that. we look at these issues. in florida's constitution, a quality education is now in the florida constitution. i do believe that in america, particularly, everyone is entitled to a quality education. and most certainly in this country, people should not go to bed hungry. that is just unacceptable.

the way that the misery index in this country is one that is way out of the line because of the recent economic situation. i do not think that we as a country even understand how the unemployment has affected so many families, and we have a whole new strata called the new league for, people who were driving forces yesterday and in bread lines today -- who were driving portias -- driving porsches yesterday and in redlines today. we need to make sure americans had the opportunity to have reasonable health care. not excessive. the fact is we've got to make sure that what happened in past -- and we know that.

a lot of costs have spiraled out of control. we have to have a baseline. this country has promised that in a sense of being a land of opportunity for all its people. the resources that we have in this country are such that we have to make sure that the least among us are protected. so i hope that one day we will see that happen. >> thank you very much. our thanks to steven zack, president of the american bar association. we also thank our audience is here and on radio television and the internet. tonight's program has been part of the commonwealth club's u.s. constitution in the 21st century series, underwritten by the charles guess he family, and

we thank them, and we thank you. [applause] >> sanrio famous for the designs for hello kitty. i thought i would try to make it as cute as possible. that way people might want to read the stories.

then people might be open to learn about the deities and the culture. ♪ they reached out to make about five or six years ago because of the book published. they appreciated that my work was clearly driven from my research and investigation. after i contributed my artwork, the museum was really beside themselves. they really took to it. the museum reached out to me to see if i would be interested in my own space inside the museum. i tell them that would be a dream come true. it is the classical, beautiful indian mythology through the lens of modern design and illustration and storytelling. they're all of these great sketch as i did for the maharajah exhibition.

i get a lot of feedback on my artwork and books. they complement. they say how original the work is. i am the first person to say that this is so derived from all of this great artwork and storytelling of the past. the research i put into all of my books and work is a product of how we do things that a-- at pixar. sometimes you will see him depicted monkey-like or as superman. i wanted to honor his monkey coloring. i decided to paint him white with a darker face. it is nice to breathe new life into it in a way that is reverent and honors the past but

also lets them breathe and have fun. it is almost a european notion to bring these symbols and icons from southeast asia. they decorate their deities. it was a god they interacted with every day in a human way. the most important thing has been to create work that is appealing to me. i want to see vishnu to pick did in a modern way. it dawned on me by reinterpreting the deities in a way that is modern and reverent to the history, i am building a bridge for young and old audiences to make friends with the culture and these icons to learn their stories. ♪

captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> it's seems like we have plenty of people to the back of the room. you may notice that i am not -- mayor lee. i have been filling in for him a lot this year. i have been filling in for his former position. my name is amy brown. the mayor since his regrets. he has a very busy schedule, as i am sure that you understand. welcome, everyone. mostly i want to just express to you that we do know in city government how important this industry is. we know it is important for our

tourism visitors and our economy, the jobs that it directly and indirectly creates. most of all it is important because it is part of what makes san francisco san francisco. a vibrant nightlife is part of why tourists come here. the kinds of people that are creative and entrepreneurial, that come here and live here, creating jobs in high-tech industries, it is part of why they want to be here. because of our restaurants, entertainment, and clubs. i want to stress that we know how much good that you do for the city and we appreciate it. often we make it difficult to be small businesses here. i know that there is a lot of bureaucracy. we are trying, through the entertainment commission, to find ways to streamline the

process. we look forward to hearing from you how we might help the entertainment industry specifically. i know that often we focus on the negative about this industry. that is because that is mostly what we hear. complaints about noise and graffiti. obviously, we are camp -- concerned and are doing anything they can to make sure that our night life is safe for everyone to enjoy. i want to say that while we all need to work together to address those issues, we want to work to make sure that you are a strong and thriving industry. so, thank you all for being here. it is very important. i know that there will be feedback an opportunity for questions and comments. letting us know how what we might do it better. we really welcome that kind of

feedback and we look forward to working with you. thank you, and welcome. >> a good afternoon. as the first speaker said, ia am not ed lee either. again, i want to echo all of the sentiments said before me. i think that the entertainment commission has come a long way. as has the industry. we see a lot less complaints and a lot more cooperation between law enforcement and the industry. i am proud to say that that is all accomplished by four people. that is as large as the entertainment commission is.

i think that they are doing a stellar job. i look forward to working with them in the future to make things move as smoothly as we can. thank you very much. >> my old boss, with these glasses he keeps telling me that i look like the monopoly guy. pretty somber group for entertainment. i hope it is not because of the police in the room. [laughter] i go out and bought. i like entertainment. -- i go out a lot. i like entertainment. i was deputy chief when this commission was born. i know many of the entertainment commissioners. we have become friends.

that said, we have had some tough goes over the last few years. we have made gains. i do not necessarily want to give back the ground that the game with regards to making the city safer. i have a son in a band. for me to pop up at cafe dunor, trigger, or blondie's -- if they have a live entertainment permit. i was in there once and i was told to make sure that they should get a permit because i thought it was great. i do not have a lot of prepared comments. i have been to this summit before and i know that you have a lot of comments. could i take a few minutes of questions? that will leave you to your captains and permit officers.

any questions? or are we golden with regards to entertainment in san francisco? >> [inaudible] [laughter] >> san francisco police. how does he get to be a preferred vendor? >> [inaudible] >> i think is bid and clout. sell yourself to the job. keep it safe. that is how that works. >> no one has any questions?