justice thomas. thank you. justice ginsburg. thank you. justice breyer. thank you. justice alito.tice sotomayor. thank you. justice kagan. thank you. and, justice gorsuch. [applause] i would also like to send our deep appreciation to maureen, scalia, the wife of the late, great anthony scalia, and also to our white house counsel done mcgahn. thank you. [applause] we are thrilled to be joined this evening by justice anthony kennedy. justice kennedy, america owes you a profound debt of gratitude for a lifetime of novel service -- of noble service to our nation, and i want to thank you very much. thank you. [applause] very special and treasured guests tonight. we have very special and treasured guests are justice kavanaugh's amazing wife, ashley. thank you, ashley. [applause] and their two beautiful daughters, margaret and liza. [applause] and we're also joined by justice kavanaugh's mom and dad, martha and ed, thank you. [applause] pres. trump: i would like to begin tonight's preceding differently than perhaps ever -- perhaps any other event of such magnitude. on behalf of our natio

justice thomas. thank you. justice ginsberg. thank you. justice breyer. thank you, justice. justice alito. justice sotomayor. thank you. justice kagan. thank you. and justice gorsuch. [applause] >> i would always like to send our deep appreciation to scalia, the wife of the late great antonin scalia and also to our white house counsel don mcgahn. thank you, don. [applause] >> we are thrilled to be joined this evening by justice anthony kennedy. justice kennedy, america owes you a profound debt of gratitude for a lifetime of noble service to our nation and i want to thank you very much. [applause] >> very special and treasured guests tonight are justice kavanaugh's amazing wife ashley. thank you, ashley. [cheers and applause] >> and their two beautiful daughters, margaret and liza. [cheers and applause] >> and we are also joined by justice kavanaugh's mom and dad, martha and ed. thank you. [applause] >> i would like to begin tonight's proceeding differently than perhaps any other event of such magnitude. on behalf of our nation, i want to apologize to brett and the entire kav

thomas justice ginsburg justice breyer justice alito, justice sotomayor, justice kagan, justice gorsuch. (applause). i would also like to send our deep appreciation to maureen scalia the wife of the late justice scalia and to our white house counsel. thank you. we are thrilled to be join this evening by justice anthony kennedy. justice kennedy, america owes you a profound debt of gratitude for a lifetime of noble service to our nation and i want to thank you very much. thank you. (applause). very special and treasured guests are justice kavanaugh's amazing wife ashley. thank you, ashley. (applause). their two beautiful daughters margaret and liza. (applause). and we are also joined by justice kavanaugh's mom and dad. thank you. (applause). i would like to begin tonight's proceedings differently than any other event of such magnitude. i want to apologize to brett and the entire kavanaugh family for the pain and suffering you have been forced to endure. those who stepped forward to serve our country deserve a fair and dignified evaluation, not a campaign of political and personal destruct

justice kagan. thank you. justice gorsuch. would also like to send our eep appreciation to maureen, the wife of the late, great and also to our mcgahn.use counsel done thank you. we are thrilled to be joined justice justice anthony kennedy. justice kennedy, america owes you a profound debt of gratitude for a lifetime of novel service our nation, and i want to thank you very much. thank you. a very special and treasured tsh e have very special and treasured guests are justice kavanaugh's amazing wife ashley. thank you, ashley. and their two beautiful margaret and liza. (applause). >> and we are also joined by [applause]vanaugh's mom and dad, i would like to begin tonight's preceding differently than perhaps ever any event of such magnitude. on behalf of our nation, i want to apologize to britain and the entire cavanaugh family for the terrible pain in suffering you have been forced to endure. those who stepped forward to serve our country deserve a fair not agnified evaluation, campaign of political and personal instruction bas

justice alito. justice kagan, thank you. and justice gorsuch. cutback. justice alito.k you. andjustice gorsuch. cutback. i would also like to send our deep appreciation to maureen skelly, the wife of the late great anthony scully. and also to our white house counsel, don began. —— scalia. we are thrilled to be joined this evening byjustice andrew kennedy. justice kennedy, america owes you a profound debt of gratitude for a lifetime of noble service to our nation and i want to thank you very much. applause. very special and treasured tests tonight are justice kavanagh‘s treasured tests tonight are justice kava nagh's amazing wife, treasured tests tonight are justice kavanagh‘s amazing wife, ashley, thank you ashley. applause. and their two beautiful daughters, margaret and liza. applause. and we are alsojoined by margaret and liza. applause. and we are also joined byjustice kavanagh‘s mum and dad, martha and ed. thank you. commentator:. -- applause. i would like to begin tonight ‘s proceeding, differently perhaps, of any other event of such magnitude. on behalf of our n

associate justice william rehnquist to chief justice and name a new associate justice antonin scalia. one of the all-time great justices on the court in my opinion. let's start with justice scalia. scalia was a well-known conservative jurist who has served in both the nixon and ford administrations before joining the d.c. circuit in 1982. he had also served as the first faculty advisor for the federalist societies university chicago chapter. he was no stealth nominee. both sides knew exactly of the most part they were getting. what was it can't -- what was his confirmation vote? 9820, unanimous. just like justice o'connor. justice rehnquist confirmation process for chief justice was a bit more contentious. he had served on the court for 15 years as an associate justice and had accumulated a string of the sense to liberal opinions at the democrats gave him the very difficult time. they accused him of voter intimidation from his time in private practice back in arizona. arizona. they dug up a restrictive covenant that he don't know anything about, neither today by the the way until the

justice kagan. and justice gorsuch.applause} 6 i want to send our deep appreciation to maureen scalia. >> the wife of the late great anthony scalia. >> on the two are white house .anceled >> we are thrilled to rejoin this evening by justice anthony kennedy. i want to thank you very much for a life in the -- lifetime of service to this nation. i want to thank you very much. [applause} >> very special and treasure test tonight are just kavanaugh's wife ashley. [applause} and their two beautiful daughters, margaret and it like that. -- liza. [applause} >> we are joined by justice kavanaugh's mom and dad martha and edit. ed.artha and i want to apologize to brett mean tire f family for the pain and suffering you have been forced to enjoy. -- indoor. those who step forward to defend -- not ary are campaign of destruction based on lies where it what happened to -- cap not family dilates denies every notion of fairness and due process. in our country, a man or a woman, must always be presumed guilty unless and until proven guil

justice breyer: why? because by having the mock trial and talking about shakespeare , it suggests we have a relationship with shakespeare. that is all to our credit to have any relationship whatsoever. michael: what is your own personal relationship with shakespeare? did you read him? justice breyer: of course. my uncle who taught english, i never took his advice, i should have, but i was 20 years old, and he said, memorize shakespeare. i said, really? [laughter] justice breyer: he said, yes. because in a few years, maybe more than a few, when you are my age now, instead of going through your head, where am i going to have dinner? did i sleep well last night? instead of that, you have the words of shakespeare going through your mind and you will be surprised what an improvement that is. [laughter] michael: i know that -- you quote shakespeare a lot. even just know when we were talking, you remembered things. do you quote it in life a lot? justice breyer: if quote -- to quote or not to quote. i read once,

justice kavanaugh was a clerk of justice kennedy.ennedy. >> would you expect him to? a lot of people who wanted trump in office in order to nominate supreme court justice who were conservative didn't want somebody who would follow in the footsteps of kennedy. >> kennedy 90 plus percent of the time was with scalia and the conservative justices on the court. he was a swing vote on certain key issues. let's not forget the kavanaugh decision on the aca case which was eventually followed by roberts. there's no telling where they'll be on any particular issue. it will be interesting to watch. >> giving when what we heard du that hearing, when he came out swinging at democrats, talking about revenge for the clintons, a lot of people have called into question his politics and whether his motivation in rulings would be driven by politics, do you think it would be fair to ask judge kavanaugh to recuse himself from cases that have to do with democrats or sexual assault victims? >> no, he doesn't have to do that at all, and it's his decision whe

wasre justice breyer confirmed, he was, he was justice breyer on the u.s. court of appeals for the first circuit . he was nominated to that position by president carter, he was confirmed on december 9, 1980. think about that date for a moment here in december 9, 1980. that was after the 1980 election , but you may he was confirmed r 9, 1980. think about that recall, when yu the veryl ushered in of, as you tenure all know, ronald reagan. reagan revolution. not only did he defeat president carter in the presidential race, the republicans captured the senate for the first time in 26 years. justenate voted to confirm -- justice breyer in 1980, and it wasn't even close. it was 80-10. only six republicans opposed judge breyer's confirmation. judge breyer wasn't even nominated until after the 1980 election, so he was both nominated and confirmed after carter lost. think about that. after carter lost the election and democrats lost the senate. the republicans did not try to block him. they voted for him overwhelmingly. you would never see that today, no matter whic

chief justice roberts. justice thomas. justice ginsburg. justice breyer. justice alito. justice sotomayor war. justice kagan. and justice gorsuch. [applause] i would also like to send our deep appreciation to marine scalia, the wife of the late, great antonin scalia, and also to our white house counsel, don mcgann. [applause] we are thrilled to be joined this evening by justice anthony kennedy. justice kennedy, america owes you a profound debt of gratitude for a lifetime of noble service to our nation. and i want to thank you very much. [applause] very special and treasured guests tonight are justice kavanaugh's amazing wife, ashley. thank you, ashley. [applause] and their two beautiful daughters, margaret and liza. [applause] and we are also joined by justice kavanaugh's mom and dad to come up ed. thank you. [applause] i would like to begin for knights proceeding differently than perhaps any other event of magnitude. on behalf of the nation, i'd like to apologize to brad and the entire a kavanaugh family for the terrible pain and suffering you've been forced to endure.

justice kennedy. can you describe how the court changes every time a new member joins the court? justice roberts: the first thing that happens i think is the eight who were there before behave themselves better. [laughter] justice roberts: it's like having a new in-law at thanksgiving dinner. uncle fred will put on a clean shirt. that was certainly evidenced this past monday. a number of people commented to me that the oral argument was very well conducted. usually people are jumping on each other's questions, but nobody was doing that. but also i think it causes the rest of us to take a hard look at some things we might have taken for granted. for 13 years, i've been explaining my view of a particular clause to my colleagues. they know it. they know what i think. now you get somebody new, and you have to explain it a little more thoroughly, because he or she has not heard it yet, and it causes you to take another look at it. i would not go so far as to say it causes re-examination, but a new articula

justice scalia, justice pryor -- breyer and justice stevens. we have law which you can find by googling it. we try to keep people abreast of what's happening at the supreme court. at a level that would of interest the sort kaetd observer -- educated observer but not in a terrible lawyerly way. >> a call from whiches whiches. >> i was wondering if has there been a member of the other party that with held things until the last week of the vote. and if you accused me of rape -- he was calm compared to the way i would be reacting. you can't accuse someone of something and not expect them to fight back. i'll hang up and listen. >> i don't think it is true that we don't expect people to stay calm when they are accused of things. we expect criminals to stay calm and it cludz those who -- includes those who may have been wrongly accused. i'm not that sympathetic to the way that judge kavanaugh expressed his emotions was appropriate or understand. i understand him being angry but him being rangery -- angry at the senators. minimum wage if a prosecutor d

justice thomas, thank you. justice ginsberg, thank you. justice breyer, thank you. justice alito. justice sotomayor, thank you. justice kagan, thank you. and justice gorsuch. i would also like to send our deep appreciation to maureen scalia, the wife of the late great antonin scalia, and also to our white house counsel don mcgahn, thank you, don. we are thrilled to be joined this evening by justice anthony kennedy. justice kennedy, america owes you a profound debt of gratitude for a lifetime of noble service to our nation. and i want to thank you very much. very special and treasured guests tonight are justice kavanaugh's amazing wife ashley. thank you, ashley. and their two beautiful daughters, margaret and liza. and we are also joined by justice kavanaugh's mom and dad, martha and ed. thank you. i would like to begin tonight's proceeding differently than perhaps any other event of such magnitude. on behalf of our nation, i want to apologize to brett and the entire kavanaugh family for the terrible pain and suffering you have been forced to endure. those who step forward to serve

chief justice roberts: mr. stevenson, i'm -- it's a question for both sides, but i'm having trouble with a firm grasp on exactly what issues are presented. now just tell me if i've got this right. there are two. the first one, i would say, is, does someone who doesn't remember the details of their crime, can he satisfy ford and panetti simply on that basis? he knows what capital punishment is, he knows what's going to happen. he just doesn't remember what -- what he did. and the second one is whether or not vascular dementia can be a basis for a ford claim. in other words, he meets the ford standard, but it's not caused by insanity, it's called by -- caused by dementia. now am i right that those are the two separate questions? mr. stevenson: i -- i -- i think they're two related questions. and the only -- i think what we would argue is that that first question is that, yes, memory loss, with some -- something and the only -- i think what we else can render someone incompetent, and that something else may not be

we have justices who seldom have questions and we have justices who always ask questions. that doesn't seem to change from whatever position they are in. >> and what was your own approach to asking questions? justice o'connor: i asked what i thought i needed to know. the briefs before the oral arguments. we spend a lot of time in advance of the oral argument for pairing. we read the briefs filed by the parties in the case, and this unlike a lot of courts around the world, do not allow briefs by friends of the court. they can file an application asking to file a friend of the court brief, and if it's a timely request and there is no objection, it is granted. we typically have a number of friend of the court briefs in addition to one's filed by the parties, and that means you have done a great deal of reading before ever coming into the courtroom. are thoroughlys familiar with the arguments that are going to be made. ,ost of the justices, as did i have a tentative opinion before the arguments begin of how it should be resolved. we've done our homework. you can't do that and

, even as a justice is added. academic studies have shown a meaningful correlation between the party of the president and the justice or judge, and the way the justice or judge appointed both cases. listing names like warren, blackman, stevens and souter, does not gain say, the general point. of course, it is true, that elections matter in this regard. that said however, the data does not show that a political background of a justice is dispositive. there is ample evidence in literature, notwithstanding political background, where the precedence is pushed to certain result. my early story about the chief justices decision in the free exercise case, shows that the chief was among those who understood that. and to follow precedent, even where he disagreed. a specific instance, where i saw him engage in magnificent thought and treatment of nuance and complexity, involved a first amendment challenge to a federal requirement that tv networks provide time to candidates. a divided panel of the court of appeals, had uphel

justice would be on board -- justices would be on board? chief justice roberts: it is a process. some years we have had bigger numbers. i think judicial decisions should be narrower rather than broader. the way to do that is to get as many people on board as you can. if i'm going to reach a broad decision, a lot of people are going to set i am not quite sure i agree with that. they might something -- write something narrower. get more people to agree with that. one of our most important decisions, brown v. board of education is a perfect example of that. worked very hard to get everyone on board. he wanted it to be a unanimous decision to send a clear message to the american people that we are turning a page as a matter of luck. he was able to do that. -- as a matter of law. he was able to do that. brown versusn board of education was 11 pages long. one moreid if he wrote paragraph, people will start sprinting -- splintering off. have a lot of issues in the area that are not resolved and spent a generation resolving. warren thought it was m

of chief justice . jackson was one of the masters in the courts history in 63 years after his early death. i think probably most people have heard this-- infallible only because we are final. i'm not sure that everyone realizes that that first appeared in the opinion that justice jackson wrote. what i admire most as many appreciate-- is that many appreciate his pragmatism. a country lawyer, a high government official, a politician, a diplomat, prosecutor, and a member of this court. he had a knife for allocating time and talent furthering constitutional systems of government. i clerk in the 1980 term and in a 1980 article he said he thought jackson shared-- this is abraham lincoln. ability to profit from experience to accommodate his views or seemed to require accommodation but to maintain throughout his life a sturdy independence of view whereas i think it describes justice rehnquist himself. this term jackson not only personified but to find in an unforgettable essay. his virtuoso service led to anoth

and we have had several justices visit the loss goal, justice scalia, justice hagan, and justice stevens have all visited since the institute came into being. and we have a blog, which you can find by googling it. we have tried to teach people and you've them abreast of what is happening at the supreme court at a level that would interest the educated observer, but not any wonky, lawyer way. host: bob in wisconsin. caller: i have a question and a comment. has there ever been a member of the other party, a chair of the other party, that ever held things until the last week? and a quick,. comment. he was really calm to the way i would be acting, if accused of rape. you cannot accuse somebody of something and not expect them to fight back. guest: i think it is not true that we expect people to stay calm when they are accused of things. we expect committal defendants to observe a lot of courtroom manners. so i am actually not all that sympathetic to the notion that the way that judge kavanaugh expressed his anger was appropriate. or even to some degree understandable. i could understand him

chief justice roberts, justice kagan, justice -- justice breyer. they don't like being perceived as republicans or democrats. to the extent this process which is inherently political has gotten more political than normal, that has to be something are very unhappy about. >> assuming judge kavanaugh does make it to the court and become adjusted, what have we learned from clarence thomas experience on what basis judge kavanaugh if he does become adjusted into the future. >> well, justice thomas is not the most conservative justice at least in the top two along with justice gorsuch. he may have been that anyway, but it certainly the case after his experience, his views are dim and solidify. that may have been impart an effective the confirmation process, which over the years he did allude to, suggesting that it is still had an effect on him. and they have an effect on justice kavanagh. really hard to say because it is a personal thing. other justices about more difficult. confirmation processes and not been affected in quite the same way. n of course v

mister chief justice, let us begin our conversation with this question -- your position as chief justice of the united states is recognized in the constitution and the associate justice positions were created by statute. the size of the court has changed from the original six all the way up to ten during the lincoln administration and has been a tween 9 for the last 150 years. how has your position of chief justice differed from the other eight associate positions? >> the most important difference is when i get 10,000 extra dollars. it started the important stuff. in many ways it is different. in the most important i have one vote, i participate in the decision-making of the court like associate justices. i have other responsibilities, some of which are absolutely fascinating. i'm something called the chancellor of the smithsonian which means i preside at their board of regents meetings. it is absolutely fascinating because i'm not expected to know anything about what they are talking about but i do get to participate. i am chairman of the judicial conference, the body that establishes r

to my left is justice kagan. justice kagan was with justice marshall what your?>> 1987. >> it seems like yesterday. that was after having attempted princeton and oxford and harvard for law and served in -- chambers as law clerk and all of our panelists this evening clerked for one judge or another as did i. >> a good court. >> it was a great court. >> in the white house counsel's office under the clinton administration and policy counsel as deputy director, could not keep a job, apparently. taught at the university of chicago law school and after getting tenure moved on and settled at harvard. not very long after that he became dean of the harvard law school and could not keep that job either. he became associate justice, solicitor general and then associate justice of the supreme court. judge paul engel meyer, he is judge of the southern district of new york and has been 2011. i should see he came on the court in 2010. he went to harvard and to harvard law school as well. he clerked for judge wald on the dc circuit and was in the solicitor's office and then he w

justice kennedy: that i will serve justice without respect to person. justice kavanaugh: that i will administer justice without respect to person. justice kennedy: and that i will -- and do equal right to the poor and the rich. justice kennedy: and that i will

justice kavanaugh sworn in by chief justice roberts last night. he will travel to the white house tomorrow for an open ceremony. many believe this could boost their party's fortune and keeping the conversation alive about sexual assault. >> they're worried about their daughters. men are worried about their spouses but also worried about due process. we have to have a real conversation and make sure that we keep this going forward. this has cemented the democratic women or the independent women who didn't think their vote mattered. but i am and i think we will take the house. that's the first time i've said that. >> we have the power to take the gavels away from these people. the power to take the jobs away from these people. we have that power in four weeks. so don't get mad. get to the polls. we can do something about this. >> let's bring in national political reporter for news day and chief washington correspondent from bloomberg. great to have you with us -- the senate vote for justice kavanaugh is the closest in history. how big of a deal is t

justice kavanaugh clerked for justice kennedy, as did neil gorsuch. stephen breyer clerked for arthur goldberg. and that gives us -- and elena kagan clerked for justice thurgood marshal. we now have a majority on the court that not just comes from elite ivy league background, but came up through the even more elite channels of supreme court law clerks. and then i know at one point, we had talked about the religious makeup of this court. justice kavanaugh, who is a catholic, secedes another catholic, anthony kennedy, and it's intriguing to know that on this supreme court, we have five catholics, three jewish justices, and one protestant. so really, kind of different than the makeup throughout the united states, brooke. >> incredible. the faces, the additions and thinking so many of them having clerked for other justices, speaking of clerks. joan, thank you. brett kavanaugh won confirmation by the slimmest margin ever for a u.s. supreme court justice, but now he will be making history in a much different way. he will be the first justice to be backed by

we heard from justice alena k kaygan.edibly important thing to guard of being fair, impart shi impartial and not an extension of the polar environment we live in. do you think that's already happened? >> here's what's interesting. you had yesterday, justice kagen. and sotomayor. they could have said quiet but instead, said politics, they don't want politics to infect it but you also had in the last couple of days, retired justice john paul stevens, he's 98 years old and he did something you rarely, rarely see. he said because of what he thought was kavanaugh's judicial temperament that came out during the last half of those hearings, he said he thought he was unqualified for the court. so likely every norm i can think of is being broken. we've never seen that, the op-ed with the scathing language. this is new territory and we've seen, we saw with clarence thomas, certainly, clarence thomas had his share of controversy during his hearings but i'm looking at the woman there sitting in the lap of lady justice and that's some

[applause] justice stevens became the 101st supreme court justice after being nominated by gerald ford in 1975, and was swiftly confirmed by the senate in a unanimous vote. [laughter] >> that's not happening anytime soon. later, while looking at his presidency, president ford remarked he was prepared to allow history's judgment on his entire term in office to be rested exclusively on his nomination of justice john paul stevens to the supreme court. justice stevens joined the court when he was 55 years old. he served for 35 years. the third longest tenure of any supreme court justice in american history. during those years, he shaped public discourse on a breathtaking of a variety of -- on a breathtaking variety of issues from guantanamo to environmental regulation. whether it was flagburning, vote counting, or george carlin's seven dirty words, justice was often full throated, and leaves us with a rich history of his fine mind and a compassionate human being. with a sense of duty that earned him a bronze star in world war ii, he carried forward to the nation's highest court at the age

do you view justice kavanaugh as a legitimate justice? >> he's going to be on the supreme court with a huge taint and a big asterisk after his name. the partisanship he showed was astounding. the conspiracy theory he accused us of was bizarre. prior to his testimony i had already decided having gone through his record and dissents that there's a pattern that he is not for a women's reproductive choice, that is true. there's a number of other patterns that were very troubling. with regard to this sham fbi investigation, everybody knows when you interview a small number of people and not the dozens of others who wanted to be interviewed by the fbi, that is a sham. it raises more questions than it answers. >> even before the final vote on the confirmation, we heard from the top democrat on the house judiciary committee, the possible future chairman, say this about the confirmation process. >> if he is on the supreme court and the senate hasn't investigated, then the house will have to. >> you'll investigate? >> we would have to investigate a

consequential justice.can do that in two ways right now, he can drive the court hard to the right as fast as he can or he can join with justice roberts, chief justice roberts, in moving the court more deliberately to the right but in a way that preserves the institutional standing of the supreme court. since bush versus gore in 2000 the court has been viewed by so many as a partisan entity. justice roberts we know is deeply concerned about that, it's probably why he voted on the obamacare decision to preserve obamacare because he didn't want five conservative justices to overturn an act of congress on something so important. he will be looking to move moderately in moderate steps to the right, but firmly to the right. i think that brett kavanaugh is probably shrewd enough and ambitious enough in the eyes of history to want to join chief justice roberts and to be his fifth vote in that moderate, steady move to the right. he wants to be a justice that people will remember and know and i think that's the path

facing five conservative justices so it'll be for. them too for the liberal justices to achieve anything they will need to reach across the aisle their has for the past twenty years thirty years there has been a light conservative majority on the supreme court those liberals have tried a charm offensive on people like justice kennedy and sandra day o'connor to pull them over to their side but the real question we should be asking is why is that with all these cases bush v gore citizens united over marriage equality the obamacare case all these cases voting rights that it's a five to four decision in the credibility of the court is based on consensus building why are we having these cut barely majority decisions being made in the supreme court that is hurting its credibility so in fact it is reflecting the partisan divide somewhat yes ok. many thanks times from the aspen institute. and we move on now to turkey where suspicions are growing that a prominent saudi arabian journalist may have been killed inside the saudi consulate in stamb

lawyers, judges and possibly many justices were thinking. >> you say possibly even justices, which isg. do the members of supreme court e-mail each other and text each other and say, hey, can you believe what this guy said? >> i don't think we will get that kind of paper trail, john. they are all are watching and all are individually paying attention, every one of them knows brett kavanaugh in various professional ways, and some in even personal ways, so they are paying attention and they are distressed by the turn of confirmation hearings and how politicized they have gotten. i am sure some of them fret for what this particular nomination has become, and i know some of his testimony last thursday, exactly what he has tried to counter and what justice stevens was speaking to made individual justices draw back, but they are very careful not to even get a conversation going among a large group to say get a load of this. >> and some say justice stevens was a liberal, but he was a republican. >> without specific comments, as far as specific comments in kavanaugh's testimony, he just said

the cause of justice. so, thank you for speaking here, your honor. and we're also delighted to host this event because this celebration of pro bono resonates with the mission of georgetown law. those of you from the aba who may not have been to our campus, when you go to the library, and you walk in the door, you see our motto, law is but the means. justice is the end. and that philosophy, that motto, that mission defines us as an institution. you know, we start the orientation for the first year students with service projects. it's a mission that resonates through our classrooms, through our clinics, through our supportive summer fellowships in the public interest, pro bono work after people graduate, we have a low bono law firm for our graduates that we started with dla piper and aaron fox. you know, all of these things really resonate with that mission of law is but the means, justice is the end. but we take particular pride in our commitment to pro bono. you know, the faculty is deeply committed to pro

[laughter] >> justice ginsburg, when justice scalia gave the lecture some eight years ago, he went forward to judge flannery as a judge's judge, he referred. and i'd like to use that as our theme today and have a conversation with you about the art of judging. want to say something about that. >> david, i'm glad to have one of my favorite conversation partners with me and i would just like to say a word about judge flannery. i had the privilege of knowing him when i was on the d.c. circuit. he was a prince of a man. he -- you can't hear? how is this? is that better? well, judge flannery was universally respected by his colleagues and the lawyers who appeared before him. he once said, and i fervently believe that without the confidence of the citizenry in the independence and integrity of our judicial system, our form of government could not continue to exist. i'd like to say a word about justice o'connor who announced this week that she is no longer able to participate in public life, but she shared judge flannery's view of the importance of the independence and integrity of the judiciary.

i think that most of the justices, all of the justices have a conscience. think that justices on the court are put there by presidents who have a political agenda and the justices reflect that political agenda. i think it's the obligation of justices to get beyond that political justice, to jettison the political agenda, to forget about the political world they came from and look at law and justice and fairness and equality and equity as it comes before them and not how they might have looked at it when they were more political. i think, by and large, many justices do that, i don't think all do and we are stuck with that. one of the virtues of being a historian is that things will change. the pendulum swings in both directions. in terms of justice kennedy, justice kennedy has done remarkable things, some of which i completely agree with and some i don't agree with. i think he will continue to do things i agree with and do not agree with. is important to think about everything and know about everything and i suppose if my book has a meaning beyond understand

justice gorsuch clerked for justice kennedy also. the two had a lot in common and know how justice kennedy thought about things for the time of their clerkship. he'll make a great supreme court justice. for years he has been one of the top 10 or 12 judges in the country. many of his law clerks went on to serve as supreme court law clerks. there was every reason to name him to this position, and i have no doubt whatsoever he'll put this ordeal behind him and serve the constitution, the court and the country to the very best of his ability. lou: i have no doubts either. i don't think fair-minded people in this country have doubts either. let's talk about what is before us politically. this president has moved forward this second nominee successfully to the supreme court. he is winning on every element of his duty, whether it's foreign policy, domestic policies, markets, economy, china, north korea, iran. did i mention russia? it is a man who is putting on an extraordinary, extraordinary level of effort and result the likes of which we

he constantly criticizes his own justice department colluding urging the justice department to prosecute or not prosecute certain individuals. he has criticized the special counsel investigation into russia's interference in our election as a witch hunt, not within the growing number of convictions in guilty pleas obtained by mr. mueller. he has explored what he has the power to pardon himself, family members or associates. the future status of rod rosenstein, the deputy attorney general who supervises the congressional counsel investigation is in jeopardy as president trump has made it known he would like mr. rosenstein's to go. we need a supremep court justice that can stand up to the president, stand up for their role of law, stand up for the independence of the judiciary based on his track record i'm not convinced thath it justice kavanagh would do that. while serving on the court of appeals for the d.c. circuit, judge kavanaugh considered the constitutionality of the affordable care act of 2011. the court upheld the constitution, constitutional of the affordable care act by a three

justice, thank you all very much, keep up the faith. [applause] >> as i said, so this -- so you, such a see handsome crowd for this fundraising event supporting institute for learning. it is a not-for-profit volunteer educational organization. it is aand we meet today at the fellowship for boca raton. and c-span is here. so this is a historic occasion. i am the chair of il ir. you encountered several board members making your way into this room. waynt to acknowledge carol in the back, our executive director. doing on the heavy lifting associated with this. there are a couple of business items i have to address. photographs and recordings are not permitted. we have already turned off the cell phones. ilir, we arebout beginning our full session on monday the 15th. scheduled open house for next week, the 10th, at 1:00 at the boca raton community center, which is right near the .ity hall forhave a program brochure the full eight-week session. and those of you new to il ir, there are sign-up sheets in there as well. the business at hand, we

and as a justice dispensed justice for this country. and so this statue of justice, we hope, will be in your new office, wherever it is. >> thank you. >> and a reminder of -- >> congratulations. [ applause ] >> and since you said that you are going got the fade from the scene but will be very active in the future, we thought you should have copies of the commentaries, the important book that brought joseph story to attention. these are the commentaries on the constitution written by joseph story. >> thank you so much. [ applause ] >> and joseph story was very smart. he not only wrote the big book, but he also wrote the cliff notes. [ laughter ] and so here is a familiar exposition of the constitution of the united states by joseph story. i'm proud to say i had the privilege of writing a foreword to this. [ applause ] thank you, kay james for being with us tonight. and thank you again, senator, for all you have done in your terrific history of 42 years. we wish you the best of luck in the future. don't forget heritage, and come back ofte

instead it will be done by chief justice john roberts and retired justice anthony kennedy in a private ceremony. >> the nomination of brett m. kavanaugh of maryland to be an associate justice of the supreme court of the united states is confirmed. >> but first let's look at the protests under way right outside the u.s. supreme court. kavanaugh is inside. mike viqueira is there. tell us what you're seeing. >> reporter: it's an extraordinary moment. i don't know what else to say. the day was petering out, the crowd was thinning out. had been a crowd down at the supreme court where you see on the sidewalk for hours making speeches, cheering anti-kavanaugh chanting. and then let's look at the door here. and then this moment. just as they did at the capitol, rushing to the top of the steps of the supreme court and now besieging the front door of the supreme court. i don't recall ever seeing a scene like this. obviously a lot of passion in this crowd. whether or not there carries over to november is a distinction that nobody is concerned about with at the minute. it's getting hard to hear in

it's up to the justice. if that was his intent, , it did not work. following intense criticism, grant appointed a new special prosecutor, james brodhead, and investigation continued. it's of course important to note that special counsels are not the same as independent counsels. pursuant to the ethics in government act, an independent counsel is appointed by a three-judge panel of the d.c. circuit court of appeals and was truly independent from the justice department. for all intents and purposes, an independent counsel was the attorney general when he came to rethink the specific matter that led to his or her appointment. that is not the case for special counsels, at least in theory. the days of the independent counsel ended, at least for now, when the act expired in 1999 and was not reauthorized. the robert mueller is supposed to be governed by doj guidelines and his investigation is being overseen by the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein because the attorney general jeff sessions has recused himself. this may be significant but under governin

justice thomas, and chief justice roberts. the first justice to be nominated by president trump, neil gorsuch, was a student of doug ginsburg. he graduated from the latin school in chicago in 1963 and attended cornell university for 2 years. he told me he was studying classics and english -- in english and was heading in the direction of a phd and a career in education. he realized he did not want to be a professor. he left cornell and together with two friends from harvard, these three young men way back then, founded the first computer dating service called operation match. it was very successful. after a few years he decided he wanted it to -- a career in law. he returned to cornell, got his bs and then the university law school and then graduated in 1973. at only 29 years of age, 29, having been howard -- hired right after graduation and clerking in the courts, he clerked also for justice thurgood marshall, he was hired by harvard law school. judge ginsburg was tapped to serve in the reagan administration in several positi

justice kavanaugh, justice gorsuch and 26 circuit court justices.ed on the campaign trail he would appoint constitutionalist judges who won't make up the law as they have go along, and he delivered on that promise. much of the credit here has to be shared with leader mcconnell and those in the senate who saw through exactly what this is, hyper partisanship. hysteria, dark money perhaps. and a lot of dark language. i'm proud of justice kavanaugh for sticking with it. most of presidents would have pulled the nove -- would have pd the nomination. you don't let yourself be bullied and lied about and insulted. you don't give in to the hysteria. you fight back if you know you are innocent. he'll be to work on monday or tuesday. judge jeanine: kellyanne, we are both lawyers. one of the things that frightened me as someone who tried rape cases and decided what cases could go forward was the idea as women that they should unequivocally be believed and men could call it a kay with the up ending of everything you and i learned in law school about the presumpti

he is now justice kavanaugh.finally, kavanaugh wasn't the only story this week. >> if you think this is a search for the truth, you probably ought to put down the bomb. >> trying to intimidate the senate to defeating a good man. >> how did you get home? i don't remember. how did you get there, i don't remember. >> it was another statement to show that this value. >> i felt kavanaugh was treated like crap. boo yourselves. >> i hope we can say no to mob rule. >> their mothers didn't breast-feed them. she didn't have to, they went to romney. >> just for the babies out there that keep talking about tariffs. >> you can practically hear the sounds of the democrats moving the goal posts. >> they are not moving the goal post. >> then we fell in love. he wrote me beautiful letters. >> and their great laughter. >> it's like going to get better with time. >> judge kavanaugh may have been accused of throwing some ice. talk about a bombshell. >> this entire thing makes me want to heave. >> i can honestly say have never had a

the chief justice. if washington got into trouble, not likely but if washington had been impeached by the house, jon jay-- john jay would be presiding over the title of his loss. and then the final reason that people gave was that treaties are the supreme law of the land, so that means that john jay is helping to make laws that he will then have to interpret as a judge. they thought that there was something on-- something weird about being both a legislator and a judge so they gave multiple reasons. the senate thought otherwise because he went to negotiate the treaty with france. the final vote was 18 to 8. this did not prevent people from complaining. one said it was contrary to the spirit of the constitution, and more claimed it was the most dangerous measure in the annals of the united states. >> one private organization says the constitution has been trampled upon because the government had united powers. he would negotiate a treaty which is an executive power, he would be making a treaty which woul