earl warren, the governor of california, is withholding the delegation's votes. n tells eisenhower, "i'll deliver the delegation for you on one condition. i wanna be the next chief justice of the supreme court." ike, the great war hero, shakes hands, says, "you got a deal." he wins. one year later, earl warren is the chief justice of the united states supreme court. rod wanted a political appointment from obama, and for that, he was prepared to trade obama's old senate seat, which is actually legal. otherwise, eisenhower would have gone to jail, and americans would not have "liked ike." do you see yourself as somebody who was just trying to function in perhaps an inherently corrupt but legal system, and that theoretically almost any politician could be snagged the way you were? absolutely. of course i do, except i'm giving me higher marks. because i was using that money that--that-- and that power gave me to fight an established system that served itself on the backs of the people, and when you do that, you piss a lot of people off, and they wanna get rid of you.

earl warren puts this thing together. interesting that this case was argued in 52. the chief justice of the supreme court dies after oral argument. chief vinson, who was to be leaning toward dissenting. he dies and gives the president an opportunity to appoint a new justice who happens be earl warren and integration from california who then comes on the court and leads this consensus and this opinion remarkably concise, it's thought it was 13 pages. i looked at the it stops at 12. the internet's wrong, by the way, h.a. was wrong on this as well. a caution to everyone. randall, i saw you right that this was probably in and perhaps. but then you went on to say, but it rendered the opinion pallid. yeah. what you mean? well, we. chief justice warren right before. you know, handing down the opinion writes a memo to his colleagues describing what he's attempting to do and he says, i want to write opinion that is brief. write an opinion that regular people can read and write. and he says he says and above all write an opinion that is non accusatory. now he wanted to write

the social transformations brought about in the '50s and '60s by the court under chief justice earl warrenhe subsequent court under chief justice warren burger that gave us roe v. wade. nominated by president eisenhower, chief justice warren, the former governor of california, saw that america was changing and he recognized that the constitution, which he saw as a living document, could help bend the arc of the moral universe toward justice. warren's court unanimously found that segregation was unconstitutional. his court also pushed back on voter discrimination. in two key redistricting cases that expanded voters' rights the court ensured fair representation and restrained gerrymander gerrymandering. the warren court also expanded protections for defendants with an unjust criminal justice system. equality was the centerpiece of the court, which transformed america in the 20th century, bringing us closer to that mythical perfect union. the legacy of the warren court is a gift to women and people of color. but it is an abomination to conservative jurists like clarence thomas, who in the hei

and that'w' always thought i'm very glad that earl warren had some experience with politics, saying itm not saying never. i'm saying never. but i am saying you have things like your own background that have political and you have listening to■ othes and you have sometimes the real politic. e, but i used to say, you ever read p.g. funny. in one of his statements, he says ofhe wasn't disgruntled. but he wasn't exactly grumbled either. so that's sort of it. but i think is better. i it's better. no the of the d judges do take into account the season the climate of the■v■u season. and that's sort of where we are, which not a real answer,experie. why? at the end of the book, i would say you're a very you're optimistic and your optimism uplifts, all of us. it uplifts me in tough times. but i would call the end of the book studiously agnostic about you say these are very serious times. you strongly oppose the tax fairness project and you fear that itstoppable and. yet you say in the end you think that they'llba do think they'll? well, you're on the court a long time. you're and it takes time t

brennan, let's impeach earl warren today. people don't like where the trump court is going and maybe with good reason. and so life tenure creates a problem. this the this this term proposal. what regular rise it if it were adopted. and there's a lot of details that have to be worked out. but if it were adopted immediately, the most senior justice who's got more than 18 years would have to retire. that would be justice, thomas. he would have to step back and the president turning over of want justice. and that would keep the court in the sense being fluid and not bound by people that have been there for 30 years. his views are out of step with the public. all right, professor or a little is always so we really appreciate your time and your insight. thank you so much. thank thank you so much. thank story. >> well for your health of the san francisco department of public health is recommending that people start to wear masks again. then some indoor settings and a post on x. the department asked people to consider wearing masks i

example in 1876 when the justices agree to help resolve the election dispute or in the 1960s when earl warren agrees to supervise the warren commission and then they also set an important precedent on the other side in the neutrality crisis, washington and jefferson wanted the justices to answer a long list of kind of abstract questions, and there was a lot of precedent in english law for that but jay and the other justices thinking about it said said no. that's not our job. we decide cases in controversy. so in a sense, he both helps establish. kind of what the court will not do and what the court will do. um, and it's also incredibly important when you just think about if you've ever been involved in starting something from scratch, you know, jay and the other justices are starting something from scratch. and they do a pretty good job of that so that by the time don marshall comes there's a functioning court for them to to build upon. thank you very much for all that. um, maybe first of all you you have a bunch of important corrections and you're absolutely right about pierce brother. i was

juice cups, and these guys were there drinking until to four and five o'clock in the morning and as earl warren the head of the warren commission said in the hearings after the assassination looking into the causes, you know, i'm sorry direct rowley you cannot tell me that a man who's been up till two four five in the morning whether he was drunk or not is his able to react to protect the president the next morning and and that just is a fact and just true. right, very very unfortunate. i also know very little about guns. so to join hop onto that train as well the end of a gun. someone's gonna like go care all. no, we all understood. i i also have to ask because unfortunately the 1960s were very tragic decade with multiple assassinations of president of a president and some non-presidents as well. and you describe in the book how the assassination of robert kennedy changed the secret services mission in another way. how did that assassination? change their mission such a devastating time and such of like trial by error, you know. trial by fire like just such an awful time in the sense of okay.

and that's why i've always thought i'm very glad that earl warren had some experience with politics, saying it was tough, getting that brown partly enforced. and so i'm not saying never. i'm saying never. but i am saying you have things like your own background that sneaks and you have political and you have listening to others and you have sometimes the real politic. so ended up by not a good quote, but i used to say, you ever read p.g. wodehouse like p.g. wodehouse? very funny. in one of his statements, he says of bertie woke up one morning and he wasn't disgruntled. but he wasn't exactly grumbled either. so that's sort of it. but i think is better. i it's better. no judge takes into account the of the day but all judges do take into account the season the climate of the season. and that's sort of where we are, which not a real answer, not a definite answer, but an experience allowance. why? at the end of the book, i would say you're a very you're famously optimistic and your optimism uplifts, all of us. it certainly uplifts me in tough times. but i would call the end of the book s

. >> earl warren was the district attorney in the office that she worked under, which means that is deep and ethics in every young lawyer is always nervous. the first couple of times you appear in court because you stand before a judge and they say counsel, state your appearance, and you say kamala harris for the people and that was her case when she ran for president in 2020. and she made that case in the courtroom and now she's making it across the country. she's running for the people on the issues they care about. and by the way, john donald trump has been going around saying he's going to easily beat kamala harris well, she's heard this before from other sexual predators and rapists when she was prosecutor harris and if he wants to know how this movie ends, he won't have to look too far, but he's going to have to go to a prison to find out because she put away a lot of bad guys and she's ready to make the next case for the country. >> you mentioned the 2020 campaign and luxury level. what i mentioned this, but you did run in that campaign for a second yourself she didn't win. in fac

brandon, let's impeach earl warren today. people don't like where the trump court is going and maybe with good reason. and so life tenure creates a problem. this the this this term limit proposal. what regular rise that if it were adopted. and there's a lot of details that have to be worked out. but if it were adopted immediately, the most senior justice who's got more than 18 years would have to retire. that would be justice, thomas. he would have to step back and the president will get another appointment and then the ideas every 2 years, we would have a regular turning over of want justice. and that would keep the court in a sense being fluid and not bound by people that have been there for 30 years. his views are out of step with the public. >>all right, professor or a little is always so we really appreciate your time and your insight. thank you so much. >>more news comingpolice are searching for the person who killed a 16 year-old girls in hayward over the weekend. kron four's michael thomas has more on the investigatio

you'd see big billboards that said, "impeach earl warren."ons that the supreme court, headed by earl warren, had made. chief among them, brown v board of education in 1954, which basically put the nail in the coffin of jim crow and segregation, or at least started that process in the south. so how do you respond to people who would say that, look, this is just the mirror image of that? this is progressives upset with a very conservative court that is making decisions that people like you and i might not like, but the way to change that is to do through the process and, over time, change the competition of the court, as conservatives did all too successfully, and then you can get some of this reversed. how do you respond to that? >> i think it is very different. i think you're talking about two separate and important issues here. one of them really goes to the ethical lapses on the court, which is very different from what you're discussing, right? so when you're talking about justices who are accepting rvs or fishing trips in alaska at exclusi