right now we will turn to sandra day o'connor. 30 years ago, o'connor became the first woman to sit one bench of the united states supreme court making women's history and becoming a role model to millions of women and girls. justice o'connor is no longer on the supreme court she is keeping busy i recently spoke with her about what she is doing now as well as what it's like to be a pee near. pioneer. >> for us ladies of a certain age we were so excited when you were nominated for the court. it is impossible to believe that it's 30 years ago. >> it's been a longtime. >> can you tell us the story what was it like when you found out? >> well, it was a shock. i mean who would think for a moment that some cowgirl from southeast arizona would be asked to serve on the supreme court? it was a shock. >> that is how you see yourself? >> a cowgirl? >> well, that what i was. i had a little education along the way so i hoped i learn something in the process. but i never expected to be asked to serve on the supreme court. i was very honored. i wasn't sure i should do it. i never argued a case at the

i think sandra day o'connor's opinion in the michigan affirmative action cases was a significant mark. and a positive mark in the court's history. the shift here i think is clearly toward more conservative opinions, or cutting back on rights, cutting back procedurally in terms of how people can go forward and bring their claims. the walmart case this summer was an example of that, the inability of lawyers to bring class action cases, a huge class action cases in some cases, that are representative of issues women will face in the workplace. that was a setback, not that those class actions will not go forward and cases will not go forward. but i think these are all indicators that we are pushing back on rights that all of us who have been lawyers and acticing lawyers and teaching lawyers believed were secure. i am not encouraged by that. tavis: speaking of gender equality of the last 20 years, a couple of women have made it to the supreme court during the time since your testimony at the thomas hearings. what you make of the increase in gender balance on the supreme court? >> i am exci

sandra day o'connor has one of the best statement. in every society, there have to be a safe place. in a democracy, that is a place that is the courts. we have to have the average citizen talking about how they want to preserve that save space in our society and talk to their legislatures, because there is a view among legislators, not all of them, but many, that the courts are another agency. it is not another agency. it is a co-equal branch of government but is necessary to protect our fundamental liberty, and to be such a branch, it needs adequate funding. when they say we have an economic crisis, we do have an economic crisis. there is no question about that. don't put the courts as another library for another road. it is not. it is the basis why we today enjoy our freedom. we have got to make that clearly understood. every time you talked legislator, every time you have an opportunity to talk to a civic group, you need to make that distinction. >> thank you. the next question from the audience, if you could choose only one reform of the american justice system, what would it be

we had three republican appointees, sandra day o'connor.ket souter, justice kennedy who voted to uphold the heart of roe v. wade though not the precise holding of roe v. wade. scalia, i don't know how that's following precedent. in the event, i think what we need to do is get 5 of our supreme court justices -- this is one of my plans just for laughs to start engaging in conservative so we have a right to a flat tax. we'll have a right to own a rocket-propelled grenade. we'll have a right to free champagne for blondes all kinds of fantastic rights i can think of. oh, i think we'll declare the withholding tax unconstitutional they know our justices can admit it was a joke because liberals can never understand how heinous their policies are until it's done to them and the alternative plan to -- i can say it much more quickly we need a conservative and republican executive who say in response to an insane supreme court ruling, for example, some of the guantanamo rulings under president bush -- i wish he just said thank you for your opinion. the

and i think i remember -- perhaps i should not be saying it publicly -- i think remember sandra day o'connor saying that it reminded her of president nixon's suggestion that he should have military personnel at the white house have white uniforms. she thought it was a very bad idea, and she also thought it would be a bad idea for the court to depart from the very conservative black robes that we have always followed. i do not think the chief needs a special form of address to identify himself. >> what would be the legalisms of that? would you be able to put four stripes on your robe if you wanted to? >> i believe so. >> could the other justices have prevented the chief from putting stripes on his robe? >> that is an interesting question. i do not know. i suppose if we felt strongly enough about it and as a majority asked him not to do it, he probably would have respected that. but that is the kind of thing that each member of the court pretty much respect the judgment of the member who may be doing it, i think. >> who assigns something as simple as an office? how do you get to choose your of

. >> is it different with three women than it was with only two or only one with sandra day o'connor?ifferent and i like it. now you are going to say how is it different? and at that point, i can't really tell you. >> can't tell me. >> think having different backgrounds and points of view and three swim a plus. >> i was listening to justice begins berg this weekend, a interview she did with a california law professor, surlt pricing thing is the college y'allity and the friendships. >>> it has been. afrnlts cross political divides. >> it is not really political there are two big questions in this book. one is the question, why do people follow us? why? and history helps to anticipate that i go to schools and say we are junior league politicians, we don't do that law is not mechanical, can't be generated by the computer, the job a job that calls often for the weighing of values, calls of the for an application of values that don't change much since the 18th accept chur rib, applying those to a world that didn't change, does change, will change, every minute. you know, george washington

until then, have a terrific sandra day o'connor and hope to

we had three, you know, three republican appointees -- sandra day o'connor, david hackett souder, justice kennedy who all voted to uphold the heart of roe v. wade though not the reice holding. as and ally ya said, i don't know how that's fouling precedent. -- following precedent. in any event, we need to get five at large supreme court justices. this is one of my plans, just for a laugh to start engaging in if conservative activism and to hallucinate the sort of rights equivalent to the rights being hallucinated by the liberal justices so that we'll suddenly have a right to a flat tax, we'll have a right to own a rocket-propelled grenade, we'll have a right to free champagne for blonds. um, all kinds of fantastic rights i can think of. oh, i think we'll declare the withholding tax unconstitutional. and then our justices can all admit it was just a joke because liberals can never understand how heinous their policies are until it's done to them. and the alternative plan to, i can state much more quickly, we need a conservative, a republican executive to say in response to an insane supreme

we had three republican appointees, sandra day o'connor, justice kennedy, all voted to uphold the heart of roe v wade but not the precise holding of roe v wade as antonin scalia said. don't know how that is following precedent. in any event what we need to do is get five of our supreme court justices. this is one of my friends as a laugh to engage in conservative judicial activism to hallucinate the sort of rights equivalent to the rights being hallucinated by the liberal justices so that we have a right to a flat tax, a right to own a rocket-propelled grenade, a right to free champagne for blonds. all kinds of fantastic rights i can think of. we will declare the withholding tax unconstitutional and justices admit it was a joke because liberals never understand how heinous their policies are until it is done to them and the alternative plan to -- we need a republican executive to say in response to an insane supreme court ruling for example the guantanamo ruling under president bush i wish he had just said thank you for your opinion. the constitution makes me the commander-in-chief. i a