justice ginsberg has had frequently when she joined, justice o'connor was the best friend any justice could have. she show appreciated her thoughtfulness and support, and their shared expenses. manifesting itself and how to justice o'connor view and value justice ginsberg? >> i think she valued her very much. they both respected one another greatly. they had a little bit of a competition over who would get out the first opinion. [laughter] >> which was kind of fun. i think,ce o'connor, respected her tremendously. and it was just a wonderful for us to be able to be there and see that. >> that is remarkable. justice ginsberg says in her in my own words book that justice o'connor's advisor was just get the decision out as fast as you can, see do not get a really boring assignment the next time around. but i do not realize they competed. so i have to ask the august one -- who won? >> well, my coker lark -- my co-clerk is setting in the audience. i believe we won. insight on the justice ginsberg justice o'connor relationship? >> just to echo what mike co-clerks have -- what my co-clerks ha

nine justices. nine justices are coming together unanimously 40% of the cases and that number has remained essentially consistent for the last 100 years. the number of 5-4 cases this past term was maybe 18 but most of those were not the 5-4 we think of. the 5-4 we think of our just a handful. the differences are exaggerated and similarities should be looked at as well. personality-wise, both justice gorsuch and sotomayor treat their clerks the same. justice sotomayor routinely officiates wedding. justice gorsuch has people over. they come to thanksgiving, christmas if they are not flying kannon: let me ask about thees. role of the law clerks because there has been a lot of writing with some criticizing the law clerk system for giving law clerks significant power and esponsibility. having spent a year, more than a year at the court, what is your reaction? anyone can weigh in on this. justice kruger: my view may be a little bit colored by who i worked for but there was really a, sort of, no doubt that

with both justices, you know, i think i would say something that justice justice gorsuch always told me justice white told him when he clerked for him which was, you know, no one appointed me, and i wasn't confirmed by the senate. at the end of the day, it wasn't my job to push my view of the case. and i recall in particular one case where i disagreed quite strongly, and we talked about it for really weekes on end. and at the end of the day the justice said, thank you very much, i appreciate your views, i think i've made my decision, and we just disagree. and then the i went around to every chambers and tried my best to get other justices to agree with that justice's view because that was my job. so it didn't make it difficult for me to work with two justices from, you know, so-called -- what some might perceive as different ends of the spectrum. and the other thing i would say is i think that the differences between the justices are often exaggerated in the media just sort of generally and, you know, we shouldn't forget that. i think it's now 40% of cases are decided unanimously. th

it makes sense when justice ginsburg joins justice o'connor on the bench in 1993, the two bonded over their historic role in transforming the supreme court. both justices had to overcome discrimination and professional rejection, but justice o'connor once put a helpful spin on it if they had come of age when women could easily be lawyers, she told justice ginsburg, they would probably end up as retired partners at some law firm. but because that route was not open to us, justice o'connor explained, we had to find another way and we both ended up in the united states supreme court. one woman they inspired was a young attorney in manhattan. she had been working in the da's office in 1981 when she heard president reagan had nominated sandra day o'connor. just two years earlier, she and her law school classmates had wondered allowed if they would ever see a woman on the supreme court in their lifetimes. little did sonia sotomayor imagine that 20 years later she would become the third woman on the court and make history in other own right as the first latina judge you the. these three wome

it turns out that justice ginsburg and justice o'connor share a distinction, that is interesting nicknames. when justice o'connor was confirmed, she earned the moniker -- for first woman on the supreme court. justice ginsburg has been grounded the notorious rbg, so i will leave it to you to decide which one is that year! they share a lifelong commitment to expanding opportunities for women. so it makes sense that when justice ginsburg joined justice o'connor on the bench in 1993, the two bonded over their historic role and transforming the supreme court. both the justices had to overcome discrimination, and professional rejection. but justice o'connor once put a helpful spin on it. if they had come of age when women could easily be lawyers, she told justice ginsburg, they will probably have ended up as retired partners of some law form. but because that route was not open to us, justice o'connor explained, we had to find another way, and we both ended up in the united states supreme court. one woman they inspired was a young attorney in manhattan, she had been working in the da office in 1

justice kagan: right? spinelli: yes. justice kagan: right? chief justice roberts: so -- justice kagan: and there's different kinds of -- spinelli: and here -- justice kagan: -- non-mandatory schemes. chief justice roberts: so -- spinelli: i apologize. chief justice roberts: well, no, i don't know which one of you i was interrupting. spinelli: no, please, mr. chief justice. chief justice roberts: sets them out like in 3553, is that the sentencing considerations? roberts: is that enough? here are the things you need to consider and transient youth or incorrigibility is one of them? spinelli: and requires the courts to consider them, then we can presume that the judge followed the law and did so. but this is not a case where the judge was required to consider anything. and, in fact, she did not consider imposing any lesser sentence than life without parole. and the warden's position and the united states' position is that that's good enough. justice kavanaugh: back on justice kagan's question for a second. in a discretionary regime where the sen

nine justices. are cominges together unanimously 40% of the cases and that number has remained essentially consistent for the last 100 years. the number of 5-4 cases this past term was maybe 18 but most of those were not the 5-4 we think of. the 5-4 we think of our just a handful. the differences are exaggerated and similarities should be looked at as well. , both justicese gorsuch and sotomayor treat their clerks the same. sotomayor routinely officiates wedding. justice gorsuch has people over. they come to thanksgiving, christmas if they are not flying home to be with their families. they are fundamentally very good people and treat their clerks well. kannon: let me ask about the role of the law clerks because there has been a lot of writing with some criticizing the law clerk system for giving law clerks significant power and responsibility. having spent a year, more than a year at the court, what is your reaction? anyone can weigh in on this. justice kruger: my view may be a little bit colored b

powell and justice scalia. judge what is chief judge of the us court of appeals for the seventh circuit. she has transform the law with her opinions that are definitive on the area she writes and teaches at the university of chicago law school like antitrust and international trade and business and she clerked for justice blackmun. judge sutton you clerked for both justice powell and scalia. two different approaches. how did those influence your view to be a judge quick. >> thank you for not mentioning this little thing i was hoping nobody would notice it. this is the problem to throw a 98 mile-per-hour fastball. the problem with that story is that i'm a righty and if i could and i was a lefty i would not have been a lawyer or supreme court clerk. so it was such a blessing. thank you for doing this and your leadership with the national constitution center the country is lucky and you have been amazing for that for all of us who care about the core in the constitution, all 51 of them. i really was lucky to have

was the first woman justice.he was there for quite a while byrs herself. and then you have to be the only one for a while also. she was a reagan appointee you were a clinton appointee. you are from new york city. so very quickly you established a bond. >> she was as close as i came to having a big sister but she gave me some advice, not too much she didn't want to give me excessive t information but just for the first few weeks. but then with my breast cancer but had a mastectomy and that was on the bench monday after her surgery. she said you schedule chemotherapy on a friday that way you can get over it during ethe weekend and be back in court on monday. she also said you will get calls and letters from all over. don't even try to respond just concentrate on getting the courts work done. >> i'm not telling you any secrets when i say in many of the courts biggest pictures of late you are on the dissenting side but over the last five years or more you have set my - - pulled out some unexpectedd victories i'm thin

he was joined by chief justice black and justice harlan. they were all wrong at that time. >> justice alito, it's not they were wrong. they were talking about a different scenario. a nonabolition case dealing with a test that is north of our standard. >> thank you, counsel. >> mr. chief justice, may it please the court. petitioner asks this court to define rule of insanity and to require the states to implement that rule in its criminal justice proceedings. but as this court indicated in powell, nearly 50 years ago, nothing would be less fruitful than for this court to select the rigid rule of constitutional law than insanity. that admonition rings as true today as it did 50 years ago. it's not deeply wroot rooted. ut right versus wrong test is recent vintage. the historical basis started somewhere around the 1800's and therefore it's not deeply rooted. in addition, the states have had historical and traditional discretion to both define the elements of the criminal law, defenses available in those proceedings, and the substantive rules at

every justice shakes hands of every other justice. justice bryon white, the all-pro half pack from the detroit lions, shook her hand so hard he crushed it. the first woman went into her first conference crying. there were tears squirting out of her eyes, because he had crushed her hand. and the other justices, justice stevens told us there was a tradition, the junior justice takes notes and gets coffee. justice stevens said he talked about this. we're not going to ask her to get coffee but they didn't. >> so, this brings me to the that enemiesry my thinking about justice o'connor. i'm going to ask you to respond to it. we have talked so much about how we think about her being the first. i'm always more curious about how she thought about being the first. and i say it in part because i know she spent her whole career saying it didn't matter. a wise old man and a wise old woman would come to the same conclusion. there is no such thing as female jurisprudence. we're the same. she was very meticulous about saying that her gender did not m

>> no, justice gorsuch. but we don't believe that it was right that was given to them in the sixth amendment. >> i understand that. i am talking about a reliance argument. doesn't that greatly diminish a single state's claim of reliance with respect to a subset of criminal convictions when we are talking about a constitution that's supposed to endure? >> no one, least of all me, is going to stand here and diminish anyone's liberty interests. i think that -- so i'm not -- i wouldn't take that position. but even in a long line this court's significant decisions related to criminal law and criminal procedure, the court has applied them in a forward fashion instead of retroactively. i mean, that's a concern for us. >> well, if the jury -- >> that's not -- the case of retroactivity to convictions that are already final is not before us. it would come before us in a case if you lose this one. but it -- that is not a question that we can properly address here. it hasn't been briefed. it hasn't been decided below. >

department of justice. according to the times tonight, that gives the justice department prosecutor in charge of this investigation the power to, quote, subpoena for witness testimony and documents to impanel a grand jury, and to file criminal charges. among the things that prosecutor john durham has apparently been asking in the course of this investigation that he's been carrying out in conjunction with the attorney general william barr is whether c.i.a. officials might have somehow tricked the fbi into opening the russia investigation. tricked them. as the times notes tonight, quote, the opening of a criminal investigation is likely to raise alarms that mr. trump is using the justice department to go after his perceived enemies. mr. trump is certain to see the criminal investigation as a vindication of the years that he and his allies have spent trying to discredit the russia investigation. >>> and i mean, we have seen -- we have seen this -- from the very beginning, right, we get sally yates during the

it is fair to say for those of crime, the on motivation is justice -- blind justice, in fact.know that criminal justice systems are man-made, as we said earlier. they can be broken or give us unfair results. in justice the enemy of what government should be -- injustic e is the enemy of what government should be. and some states have extraordinary powers with governors, chief executives, extraordinary powers to correct wrongs. we took advantage of that, other democratic governors as well. for the most part, unilaterally, we focused on pardons and commutations. there are some innocent people in jail, but there are -- there are no innocent people in jail, but there are some people that are in there for longer than they should be, quite frankly. i want your listeners to categorize the issues into these general categories of sentencing reform and prison reform, and kyle consequences -- and consequences and reentry. host: the argument you're making is that longer sentences are leading to more crime. that.n how does less incarceration translate into more public safety? guest: you be

julius: i clerked for justice brennan, got loaned to justice souter. listening to the panel, reminded me when i clerked for justice brennan it was at the tail end of his career. i was the 100th clerk i think. i don't know if it was annual but i remember one reunion of brennan clerks, and i remember thinking, those former clerks are so old. >> [laughter] julius: although they have had really interesting careers. in ae not done this mahth really long time, but i think it has been 27 years since i clerked and i am now in that category. it is a little bit strange. i will tell the story of my career since clerking. as you will see, it is about 10% strategy and 90% serendipity. but it has been great fun and i as lucky and privileged at the career i have as i did when i was at the supreme court getting those clerkships. i am not the only one with a story similar to this but my parents are immigrants, holocaust survivors, and the chance in this country to go to a law school like harvard and clerk at the supreme court was really an amazing thing. actually at th

[laughter] >> so justice broken phone, clerk for justice sutter. it was always at the tail-end his career. i think it was the 100th clerk and there were, i don't know it was annual, but i remember one union of many and i remember sending, former clerks are so old. [laughter] although they've had really breasting careers and i haven't done a math but it's been 20 years since i clerked and i think i'm now in the category. it's a little bit strange. you'll see it's about 10% strategy and 90% serendipity but it's been great fun and i feel as lucky and privileged at the career that i have as i did when i was at the supreme court getting those clerkships, like i'm not the only one with the story similar to that but my parents are immigrants, holocaust survivors and the chance, you know, in this country to go to law school like harvard and to clerk at the supreme court is really an amazing thing and actually at the supreme court one of the most pleasurable moments was bringing my parents to the court and explaining to me them why nazi germany -- i assume

the senate decided another justice would be the vice chief justice and preside. as long as chief justice roberts were in fact to show up in the senate during a presidential impeachment, the nixon president -- vixen precedent -- nixon as long as the chief justice had some role in participating before the senate voted as a whole, that would satisfy the constitution. to 2019, what up are your thoughts on the letter from the white house counsel's office last week to congress saying house democratic leadership has designed and implemented the impeachment inquiry in a manner that violates fundamental fairness and constitutionally mandated due process. >> the alternates in case does case- the walter next in does not support that conclusion. the suggestion that each house has sold power over a decision to impeach. it indicates there are no minimal standards that have to be met aside from the three requirements we talked about. affirmation, two thirds vote and chief justice. that, both houses have tremendously broad discretion. >> do you think there would be any differenc

chief justice? >> you may respond. >> justice ginsburg, i think it was not an historical accident. i would disagree with that description. these two things were married together in every description, the number 12 and unanimous in every description, have always been married together. >> it's hard to disagree when williams described the number 12 as a historical accident. did you just say williams was wrong in that respect? >> i think that characterization of it was dismissive. that's all. thank you. >> thank thank you, counsel. five minutes, mr. fisher. >> thank you. i like to make a couple of quick factual point in the talk about stare decisis and reliance. justice breyer, you asked about numbers and facts. we say in a reply brief use one of the states own filings that there are 36 cases on direct review in louisiana where this issue has been presented. even within that 36 you going to have arguments about whether it was adequately preserved and all the rest. we think at least in the direct review level the numbers are quite modest and will. as the court described throughout the l

about justice scalia. and everyone i think in this room knows about the unlikely friendship between the two. and interviewing justice scalia was a real treat for the book, and we interviewed him for the biography, but parts of that interview are in "my own words." and as they are so different in so many ways, going into his chambers is very different. justice ginsburg's chambers are light, airy, modern art, dozens or hundreds of pictures of friends, family, colleagues. and going into justice scalia's chambers, dark, leathery. there's a big dead animal looking down on you -- [laughter] so as i sat there interviewing justice scalia, i watched how he went from the kind of tough jurist that we all know, and his face just softened and lightened up as he talked about his good friend ruth. and he told several stories. one was when they traveled to india together, and they went to visit the taj mahal. and justice scalia described how he watched justice ginsburg listen to the tour guide describe the love story behi

and justice marshall.stice scalia from our court of appeals days. i knew justice clarence thomas, who was also on the d.c. circuit. sandra was as close as i came to having a big sister. i did have a big sister, but she died in my infancy, so i never knew her. justice o'connor was the most welcoming. she gave me some very good advice. not only when i was a new justice, but during my first cancer battle. because justice o'connor had breast cancer and she was on the bench nine days after her cancer surgeries. david: wow. jus. ginsburg: she was very clear about what i had to do. she said, ruth, you have your chemotherapy on friday, that way you will get over it during the weekend, so you can be back. [laughter] david: now, the best way to win a case if you are arguing one before the supreme court is to write a great brief, to write a -- be a great oral advocate. does the oral argument make a difference or the brief or what is the best way to win a case in the supreme court? for somebody who might want to argue

conversations] >> please welcome supreme court associate justice courses one - - justice gorsuch. [applause] [applause] >> good evening everyone. from the rit presidential foundation and institute thank you for coming this evening. in honor of our men and women please stand for the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america. into the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> before we get started i would like to take a moment to recognize with the board of trustees with pete wilson and his terrific wife gail. [applause] from north carolina. [applause] former congressman who is retired and his wife janet. so now ladies and gentlemen it is my honor to invite chairman of the board of trustees from the reagan foundation. [applause] >> welcome to the reagan library. and with justice gorsuch it is understood after being confirmed to the supreme court you never have to answer questions again that you don't want to. [laughter] instead you can ask the questions that we appreciate you making

and clerking for justice kenned kennedy. >> thank you very much for coming. i am joined today the former chairman of the sec and now managing director, also clerking for justice kennedy , private practice work now a judge us court of appeals third circuit. gretchen rubin clerked for justice o'connor the author of many best-selling books. also the host of the happier podcast and an app called better and finally clerking for justice breyer his career includes time working at ausa and investigations unit in baltimore and deputy attorney general and now a partner in a candidate for mayor of the city of baltimore. thank you very much for joining. today we will be discussing life after clerking. this is a strange topic because literally every clerk has had a life after clerking. [laughter] and their pads are as diverse with every field that extends far beyond the law and add the risk that scotus clerks come early in their career make a path of limited exposure and then look about what we want to be when we grow up. there is no denying that experience is powerful. t

justice ginsburg: justice o'connor was the most welcoming. gave me very good advice. > will you fix your tie, please? david: people wouldn't recognize me if i fixed my tie. keep it this way. all right. ♪ david: i don't consider myself a journalist. nobody else would consider myself a journalist. i began to take on the life of being an interviewer even though i have the day job of running a private equity firm. how do you define leadership? what is it that makes somebody tick? when you went to cornell, your grades were good. you applied to law school at harvard. you got into harvard law school. was the class half women and half men? [laughter] justice ginsburg: in those ancient days, i went to law school between 1956 and 1959. in my entering class at harvard law school, there were over 500 of us. nine of us were women. ronnie's class, he was a year ahead of me. there were five women. today, harvard law school, it is about 50% women. [applause] david: in your harvard law school class, you did extremely well and got onto the harvard law review a

justice stevens said she never given any trouble. i'm sure she gave them plenty of trouble but he didn't know it. >> she was relentlessly charming and i was at an event in new .ork my mother felt like a million dollars. she made everyone feel like there were the most important person in the room and that was and thatliticians gift made her perfect along with her beautiful children and handsome husband. was quintessentially american. >> she could be really bossy. >> that goes without last 10 life 10 years - - temures. she did not have better things to say about anybody in her , notty not to fight picking big fights, but she would not necessarily disagree with you in a casual conversation if it didn't need to happen. everybody got along. it was sort of a magic combination that she had. >> i never saw her working with other justices, but i saw her with other groups of men and she was just masterful. -- was able to make ever in everyone think they were in charge and they would come out exactly where she wanted them to be. it is a real sk

david: if you have decision does another justice go to another justice and say can you change your mind? jus. ginsberg: there is no orchestrating at the court. david: you got attention for your exercise game. jus. ginsberg: when it comes time to meet my trainer, i dropped everything. david: many people think that the court is political. jus. ginsberg: people have that view because agreement isn't interesting. disagreement is. >> would you fix your tie? david: people will not recognize me. leave it this way. alright. i don't consider myself a journalist. nobody else would consider myself a journalist. i began to take on the life of being an interviewer even though i have a day job of running a private equity firm. how do you define leadership? what is it that makes somebody tick? let me ask you a question at the beginning. how does it feel to get up in the morning and know that 330 million americans want to know the state of your health that day? [laughter] jus. ginsberg: it is encouraging. it helps to know that people are rooting for you. it is not universal. [laughter] when i had pancr

justice to his clerks.how many of these old dogs do you recognize? and i thought about it and candidly i can identify about half. then he said something that shocked me and said me to. [laughter] and then he said something that depressed me at the time and that's the way it should be. and that's what will happen to me to. as a son of colorado i thought that was terrible and unbelievable. not only was he a star nfl player and rhodes scholar but a lawyer. he was one of jack kennedy's best friends and help to desegregate southern schools of bobby kennedy served on the supreme court 31 years how can anybody forget justice white? to walk those hallways now and a lot of tourist air at that portrait have no idea who they're looking at. but i think what he was telling me it was joyful the judge's role is quiet. it's upholding the constitution. not changing it. it's up to you if you want to do that. but to pass down to bequeath his wonderful legacy the joy of living a life greater then something yourself and that is

and juvenile justice. just to echo what supervisor mar said earlier, i believe this sort of justice will be critical as a move away from incarcerate rating our youth. for the past year-and-a-half, i have also been teaching youth in the community, many who have prior or current involvement and my experience as a teacher in the jails has given me a particularly understanding of the many structural impediments justice system involved in this individual's encounter and the support they need to suck said. as an educator, what i would like to do as part of this group is help come up with innovative ways to educate these kids and my experience working with men and women in the jails, what i have earned that kids are veiled in schools. i'm talking about before they're suspended or expelled and sent on their way along this prison pipeline i'm talking about the failure of schools to offer relevant petagoie. it does not resinate with learners and in this case kids who are overwhelming of color will not inspire educat

justice ginsburg at the time was the only female left. justice alito read the opinion.>> justice ginsburg has filed a dissenting opinion. >> the court does not comprehend or is indifferent to the insidious way in which women can be victims of pay discrimination. congress intended to govern real world employment practices and that world is what the court ignores today. >> she's hit the nail on the head because she definitely said they do not know what it's like in the real world. >> today the ball again lies in congress's court -- >> -- to correct the error into which the court has fallen. >> she was laying down a marker for congress. >> and in fact federal law was changed because of her dissent. >> it is fitting that the very first bill that i sign, the lily ledbetter fair pay restoration act, is upholding one of this nation's founding principles, that we are all created equal and each deserve a chance to pursue our own version of happiness. >> ruth and i were in new york city to see the play "proof." and as we walked down the aisle to our seats, what seemed like the en

justice department sort of executive level right underneath him. i mean, he's the attorney general, the number one official in the justice department, the number two official in the justice department is the deputy attorney general, the job that rod rosenstein famously had early in the trump administration. well, under ed meese, his deputy attorney general resigned in protest of having to work under somebody like ed meese. also, the head of the criminal division at the justice department resigned in protest at having to work under somebody like ed meese, who was under all of these multiple criminal investigations while still running the justice department himself. four other top officials resigned at the same time, along with those top justice department officials. all of those officials had actually conveyed a demand to the white house. they told white house chief of staff james baker that reagan needed to remove ed meese for the good of the country. needed to get him out as attorney general. get him out for the good of the country, the good of th

enter the department of justice. just for the independent counsel ,tatute was set to expire attorney general janet reno promulgated regulations -- not a statute. this is unilateral executive action -- providing for an office of special counsel. those regulations took effect on july 1, 1999, and assuming they are valid, which they are not, they are still in effect today. ther these regulations, attorney general can appoint a if proceedings by the department of justice would present a conflict of or extraordinary circumstances, it would be in the public interest. notice that the special counsel has to be a lawyer with a reputation for integrity -- nobody else has to be a lawyer with a reputation for integrity, including the solicitor general. just has to be learned in the law, right? last clause, that special counsel shall be elected from outside the united states government. in the regulations that the special counsel cannot be somebody who is already a constitutional officer of the united states. that's the rub here.

in decades who is also the median justice on the court. termw how we operated last in the two most important cases. we saw how he used his power. he cited with conservatives to -- he sided with conservatives and saying the government -- he voted with liberal justices to stop wilbur ross's plan to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census saying the reasons he gave were not believable. explore all of this with the distinguished panel of experts we have up here. we will take your questions as well. be thinking. i'm going to give short introductions. more, as i to know heard justice clarence thomas once say to a house panel, google it. [laughter] robert cultural is a professor of history and sociology at george washington university. as well as specializing in legal history, he has taught tort and criminal law. he is an expert on the second amendment. associate.an is -- professor of law in houston. he specializes in constitutional law, the supreme court, and the intersections of's law and personality. if the author of three books. i forge

it's a justice issue. it's a bottom line issue for those of us who care about government and fairness. >> by the way, viewers likely to hear more about the first step act over the course of the next couple days with that forum on criminal justice down in south carolina. but if you want to go back and take a look at that press conference from the justice department with the deputy attorney general -- >> one more thing. we talked earlier about -- the last caller talked about discrimination. one of the earlier callers talked about a lot of folks in these minority neighborhoods calling the police saying protect me, protect me. we're paying you for a service, i want to be protected. i want the police in my neighborhood. i want the police making arrests. i don't want you scared of coming to my neighborhood and making those arrests. everybody takes your picture these days as you're making an arrest. again, social media has impacted this a great deal as well. >> certainly a topic we talked about on this program. t

david: if you have a 5-4 decision, does one of the justices go to the other justices? jus.insberg: there is no moral -- david: if you vote for me on this one, i will vote for you on that one? >> [laughter] jus. ginsberg: it never happens but we are constantly trying to persuade each other and most of the time we do it through our writing. i am hopeful i can pick up this vote. david: many people are surprised the stability that exists between justices even though they write not such favorable things -- justice scalia is to say not such wonderful thing -- used to say not such wonderful things about your views, but you still went to the opera with him. was that hard to do? jus. ginsberg: not at all. justice scalia and i became buddies when we were on the d.c. circuit. what did i love most about him? his infectious sense of humor. on the court of appeals he would sometimes whisper something to me. it would crack me up. i had all i could do to contain hysterical laughter. but we had much in common. our styles were different but a lot aboutared writing opinions so the lawyers and

justice system. we even have -- is that -- danielle is part of our cohort and she definitelily knows as well as the candidates and just to add the criminal justice racial equity statement is there for us to have a common definition of what we aspire for but each of the departments is responsible then to build out the work that we are doing. so after the plan is done, you have to reveal it to a legislative body. we are asking that all criminal justice bodies state it to the reentry counsels and all the counsels that have accepted this so we definitely know what is taken for us with the office of racial equity as well as our criminal justice bodies. >> okay. thank you. any comments or questions from commissioners? commissioner elias. >> i wanted to know whether you reached out to the public defender's office but you said that was another group you worked with. >> yes everyone. every single criminal justice body, i mean it's like we go on a road trip trying to get everybody on the van. >> spreading the