YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Insight and Ideas: Money, Politics, and Judicial Elections

Insight and Ideas: Money, Politics, and Judicial Elections — Transcript

by The Aspen Institute · 8,654 words · 1,258 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:28e
0:58e e
1:57Now where's
2:04ladies and gentlemen uh I'm Elliot
2:06Gerson from the Aspen Institute and it
2:09is my great pleasure to give you I guess
2:11a pre- welcome to this preview of the
2:14ideas
2:15Festival uh I I first need to explain
2:19why there are only two chairs in front
2:20of you instead of three uh Professor
2:22Lawrence leig was just about to land in
2:25this beautiful Valley and many of you
2:27have had this experience before and he
2:28was diverted back to Denver so so so
2:32very unfortunate for him but as I was
2:35just saying to Justice o Conor uh and
2:37with with no disrespect at all to the
2:39remarkable Professor lesing this just
2:41means that all of you will have even
2:43more time with Justice
2:45o'conor uh the topic today is an
2:48enormously important one uh politics
2:52money judicial elections and related
2:55subjects you have an extraordinary now
2:58interviewer who was to your moderator in
3:01in Jeffrey Rosen uh probably familiar to
3:04many if not most of you uh in addition
3:06to his day job as a very distinguished
3:09professor of law at the George
3:11Washington University law school he's
3:13the legal Affairs editor of the new
3:15Republic magazine he's a fellow of the
3:18Brookings uh and he has written uh uh
3:22many books for his extraordinarily young
3:24age and he's also written extensively in
3:27other Publications as well uh on
3:30judicial legal topics and about the
3:32Supreme Court in particular and of
3:35course uh justice Sandro de o Conor
3:37needs no introduction anywhere I think
3:40particularly in this Valley where she
3:42has consistently been one of the most
3:45beloved uh speakers uh among our
3:49participants uh obviously in addition to
3:51her career and Jeff Rosen may talk a
3:54little bit about that in his his
3:56conversation with you and her remarkable
3:59career uh as a Justice uh one thing that
4:02we are all very very fortunate about in
4:04this country is that as a retired
4:06Justice she has continued to serve the
4:09country in an absolutely remarkable way
4:12most justices when they retire from the
4:14court if they retire from the court at
4:16all because many people think life
4:18tenure means you stay on the court until
4:20you die uh those who do retire rarely
4:26take the position that justice o'conor
4:28has which is to use her formidable
4:31energies and intellect to go around the
4:34country and talk about critical legal
4:36issues explain how our judicial system
4:40works indeed how our government works
4:42provide a a a a a uh an answer to the
4:47terrible problem we have with the loss
4:50of civic education in our schools most
4:52of our children don't really understand
4:54how our government works uh Sandra de o
4:57Conor goes out and speaks with young
5:00people people of all ages about these
5:03critical topics and she's also not
5:05afraid of controversy I predict that
5:07when we open to questions there'll
5:08probably be some questions that both
5:11because of her judicial temperament and
5:13for political reasons that are important
5:15she might not be able to answer but she
5:18has unlike uh any of her Brethren really
5:23jumped into public discussions and
5:25issues of great public import especially
5:28this issue of judicial elections and
5:31especially judicial elections where the
5:33power and influence of money has such a
5:36great effect so she has not just quietly
5:40retired to her beloved Arizona where she
5:42told me it was a cool 110 degrees when
5:44she left yesterday she is traveling the
5:47country and continuing to serve the
5:48country just as well and as in just as
5:51distinguished a fashion as she did for
5:53so many years on the Supreme Court so
5:55it's now my pleasure to turn things over
5:57to Jeff Rosen there will be an opport
5:59opportunity for questions and just one
6:01logistical comment uh the opening of the
6:05uh Festival will be back in this room at
6:075 o' we do need to make some adjustments
6:10and changes in the room so this will end
6:13at roughly at 4:30 so you will need to
6:15to leave enjoy Anderson Park go back to
6:19uh any of our other facilities but do
6:21plan to come back here for the opening
6:23at 5 o' thank you now just one
6:26correction I mean he had his chance for
6:29an introduction he talked about life
6:32tenure of justices I think I better stay
6:36yeah I think he has to stay here now I
6:38tried to get him to pull up a chair and
6:40join us anyway maybe he will but uh
6:44justices are just another division of
6:47federal judges and they are appointed
6:52not for life but for good
6:55behavior remember that I'll remember
6:57that remember that
7:00okay thank you very
7:06good well ladies and gentlemen as you
7:08can see from this pre uh interview we
7:11are in for a treat no uh ordinarily it
7:14would be a harrowing event for a
7:15moderator to lose half of his panel uh
7:18but in this case I cannot imagine a more
7:20exciting opportunity uh for a a legal
7:23writer and a citizen than to have the
7:24chance to sit down one-on-one with this
7:26remarkable woman and to ask her
7:28questions not only about money in
7:29politics because we're going to have to
7:30fill the rest of the half hour but also
7:32about whatever else comes to our minds
7:34so this will be like a Freer ranging din
7:37dinner party conversation and I'm G to
7:38ask whatever comes into my mind and
7:40you'll answer what you can but we'll uh
7:42we'll just have a good time but it is
7:44too bad that Larry Le it got turned away
7:47from the airport it would have been nice
7:49I was counting on him to answer all the
7:51tough questions and now he's bailed out
7:54so we're GNA have to make do some way
7:57we'll I'm we'll we'll we'll have a great
7:58time doing it
8:00ladies and gentlemen you know Justice
8:01oconor well from the Aspen Institute uh
8:04I just want to say that there isn't a
8:06day that goes by that I do not miss her
8:08presence more and more on the US Supreme
8:10Court when you see in area after
8:13area from campaign Finance reform to
8:17affirmative action to to to religion
8:19cases her wise pragmatism and uh and and
8:22and and quiet uh leadership is very very
8:25badly missed and uh and that's why it's
8:27all the more exciting to have the chance
8:29to ask her about some of these important
8:31issues today uh justice let's begin by
8:35asking uh about the topic that we're
8:37supposed to ask about and that's
8:39judicial elections how did you get
8:41interested in the problem of the
8:42corrupting influence of money in
8:44judicial elections and what is the
8:45problem in particular I've been a
8:48personal uh participant in how one
8:52becomes a judge because Arizona is my
8:54home state and uh when I was still
8:58living in Arizona a um when I first went
9:03there I couldn't get a job in a law firm
9:05because law firms wouldn't hire women
9:07lawyers that was back in 1957 couldn't
9:11be done so I had to figure out some way
9:15to uh practice law and to do some of the
9:18things that I wanted to do in the legal
9:20profession I ended up doing various
9:23things in
9:25Arizona but uh one of them at one point
9:29was to try to serve as a judge a trial
9:33court judge in Arizona and at that time
9:36Arizona had election of
9:40judges and I had to run for election as
9:44a trial judge in Arizona and I had um an
9:49opponent in the primary
9:51election uh another Republican judge who
9:54was a very good man actually I didn't
9:56enjoy running against him he was fine
10:00and but then I had an opponent in the
10:02general election and I didn't mind
10:04running against him I thought that was
10:06okay but in the election it was just
10:09what you'd expect we had to run ads and
10:13in order to run ads we had to collect a
10:16little money so you could pay for the
10:19ads and so I uh designated somebody to
10:23be my finance chairman and put a
10:26committee together to see what we could
10:28do to raise a little money and you know
10:31the people who were willing to
10:33contribute a little something were the
10:35very lawyers who thought it was most
10:39likely they would appear in my court
10:41that's who gave the money and so there
10:44you are that's just we weren't
10:47collecting big sums it probably didn't
10:50matter if some lawyer provided $50 to my
10:54little
10:55campaign but it's much more expensive
10:59Ive than that in big races for judicial
11:03office in States
11:05today in fact look at the West Virginia
11:08case where uh there was a
11:12judge West Virginia alexit
11:16judges um there U West Virginia has a
11:20lot of uh mining operations they produce
11:24coal and other things in West Virginia
11:27and one of the biggest mining companies
11:29in West Virginia had a $50 million
11:33judgment against them for something
11:36somebody had sued them and got a
11:38judgment for 50 million West Virginia
11:41just has a two-tier court system the
11:43trial court and the state supreme court
11:46and they wanted to appeal to the Supreme
11:48Court the Supreme Court there has five
11:52members and there was an
11:54election upcoming for a seat on that
11:58Court
12:00and um one of the judges was an
12:03incumbent and he had an opponent for the
12:06election well the mining company that
12:10had the Judgment against it provided
12:13almost 50 million
12:16dollar to the judge who was a candidate
12:19to keep his seat now how do you like
12:22that that's that's a little more than 50
12:24bucks isn't it so one wonders when
12:29happens whether it can be a fair
12:31proceeding well the man who got all the
12:34money surprise surprise he won the
12:37election and then the appeal Was Heard
12:40by the state supreme court and in a
12:43divided opinion 3 to two with the judge
12:47who got the money casting the deciding
12:50vote The Mining Company won well I mean
12:53this is a concern for all of us that's
12:58not the way things should work out in
13:02court because the
13:05courtroom in our country is supposed to
13:08be the one safe place where you can have
13:12a fair independent decision made by
13:17someone who's qualified to make it I
13:19mean this is vital in our system of
13:23government we we believe in three
13:26branches the third branch is the
13:28judicial branch
13:30when the framers of the Constitution
13:33wrote it they didn't provide for
13:34electing federal judges did they
13:37appointed by the president with the
13:40advice and consent of the Senate that's
13:42how every one of the original states
13:45started with appointment but by the
13:49early
13:511800s they began to change and they were
13:55encouraged by one of our then presidents
13:59to maybe consider election and starting
14:02in Georgia and then a great many states
14:06decided to switch to the election of
14:09state
14:10judges and to this day 22 out of our 50
14:15states have judicial
14:17elections now that case I told you about
14:20from West
14:22Virginia the other side that lost the
14:25case filed a petition in the federal
14:27courts and said I was going to I due
14:29process with this business of the large
14:33campaign contribution that was not I did
14:36not have due process in the West
14:38Virginia Supreme Court
14:41and the case the petition ended up
14:44eventually in the US Supreme
14:47Court and they finally got four votes to
14:50take it I I don't remember how many
14:52weeks it sat around
14:55several and it at the Supreme Court
14:58there nine
14:59justices and to accept a petition from
15:04somebody to hear the case it takes the
15:07agreement of at least four of the nine
15:10to hear the
15:11case and I'm not sure why it took so
15:14long to get four votes to take it but it
15:17did and the Supreme Court took it and at
15:21the end of the day a majority it was a
15:2454 decision held that it that um the
15:28appellant was denied due process of law
15:31with having the judge having received so
15:35much money from one of the litigant and
15:37I thought that was a an appropriate
15:41decision I mean I don't like to comment
15:44on Decisions by the court but from my
15:46perspective that was certainly a
15:49position the court could take and I
15:51think it was probably wise to do
15:54it when I lived in Arizona with our
15:57system of election of judges
15:59I ended
16:01up in time serving in the state senate
16:06as a state
16:07senator and I ended up serving as Senate
16:11Majority Leader and in that position I
16:15sponsored legislation in Arizona to
16:18amend our
16:20constitution to eliminate the election
16:22of judges in Arizona and go to a merit
16:25election scheme that went to a vote
16:30in Arizona with the voters and by a very
16:33narrow margin it passed and I have lived
16:38long enough to see that system operate
16:41and evolve in Arizona and it's been
16:46superb uh it's just remarkable to be
16:49close at hand and see their changes and
16:53it has produced some very intelligent
16:57qualified judges
16:59and no problem of campaign contributions
17:02coming into the courtroom it's just
17:05really worked well and they've opened up
17:08the process of selection in
17:11Arizona there is a commission of
17:16citizens most of them appointed by the
17:19governor who sit and consider the
17:23applications of people who want to be
17:25judges and decide which ones to rec
17:28commend for appointment and they end up
17:32recommending no more than about eight or
17:35nine people for an appointment seat and
17:41the law in Arizona opens to the public
17:44all of the hearings of that commission
17:47so any citizen can be there and watch
17:50the people who've applied come in and
17:53answer questions they can hear all of it
17:56they can read all of the
17:59applications and all of the information
18:02about the candidates and it's worked
18:04really well the other thing that Arizona
18:07does is collect information from
18:11everybody who appears in that judge's
18:14courtroom jurors Witnesses
18:18litigants
18:19um everybody can make comments to the
18:23State Bar of Arizona about the judge and
18:27say what they like or don't like about
18:30the judge and all those comments are
18:32open and available to the public and so
18:35when it comes time to have a retention
18:38election of a judge that's been
18:40appointed after six years or whatever it
18:43is their name goes on the ballot and the
18:45voters vote you want to keep this judge
18:48yes or no and they can have all this
18:51information about the judge and any
18:55complaints that have been made about the
18:57judge whether he's up to date on the
18:59case load how often he's been reversed
19:02on appeal or she as the case may be and
19:06it's worked out extremely well well I've
19:08talked too much about it but that's why
19:11I've been involved in encouraging states
19:14that still elect their judges to stop
19:17doing it I haven't won any of those
19:19battles yet but maybe it will in time
19:22maybe people will wake up I think they
19:25are waking up and uh just to confirm
19:28that the as ideas Festival is always
19:30ripped from the headlines just this
19:32morning the US Supreme Court struck down
19:35by a 5 to4 vote a pathbreaking campaign
19:38finance bill from Arizona itself now
19:40Justice I know you haven't read the
19:42decision they do here this was a law
19:45that arose out of a corruption Scandal
19:47so people were afraid that legislators
19:49were being bought and you were a former
19:51Arizona legislator you know what that's
19:52like so first the voters imposed
19:55campaign contribution limits that didn't
19:57solve the problem the next year there
19:59was the worst public corruption scandal
20:00in history known as as scam 10% of the
20:04legislatur were caught accepting
20:05campaign bribes in exchange for
20:06supporting a piece of legislation so in
20:09response to this the voters passed a
20:11referendum guaranteeing Public Funding
20:13for elections and you've said that if
20:14you can't have Merit selection Public
20:16Funding is the next best alter one way
20:18to go it's one way to go but the Supreme
20:20Court by a five to4 vote struck that
20:22down the claim was that providing uh uh
20:26Merit uh increases sort of uh markup in
20:29other words you get more public money
20:30based on how much your opponent spends
20:32if the opponent chooses not to accept
20:34the public money that that violates the
20:35First Amendment because it inhibits the
20:37speech of the person who doesn't take
20:39public money and there was really a
20:40remarkable dissent by Justice Elena
20:43Kagan who she had a great uh line where
20:46she uh talked about uh I think this is
20:49the first time that this word has been
20:52used in a US Supreme Court decision here
20:53it is she says the opponents are making
20:56a novel argument that Arizona violated
20:58the first Amendment rights by dispersing
21:00funds to other speakers even though they
21:01could have received but chose to spurn
21:03the same financial assistance some
21:05people might call that
21:07hutzpah I was very glad to see that in
21:10the US Reports especially from the woman
21:13who said that like most now tell us more
21:14about that decision that's what did the
21:16court base it on um it based it on the
21:19Davis decision from a few years ago
21:21where you were not on the court where
21:23the court uh struck down the so-called
21:25millionaires amendment that tried to
21:28give Public Funding at the federal level
21:30to people who chose not to accept public
21:33funds and the reasoning of that case was
21:35that if your opponent is going to get
21:37more money uh based on the amount that
21:39you spend that that would inhibit his or
21:41her political speech and the denters led
21:43by Justice Kagan said this is not an
21:45attempt to equalize funds at all it
21:47doesn't inhibit any speech at all it
21:49promotes speech and the framers would
21:51have insisted on something like this and
21:53she ended with a very resonant
21:55conclusion where she said well let's
21:56hear it okay here we go then tell what
21:58the division on the court was I will
22:01I'll I'll do that numbers uh so she ends
22:03up by saying less corruption more speech
22:06robust campaigns leading to the election
22:08of Representatives not beholden to the
22:10few but accountable to the many the
22:12people of Arizona might have expressed a
22:13decent respect for these objectives
22:15today they don't get it so she was quite
22:16exercised and the and the division was
22:18five to four chief justice Roberts wrote
22:20the majority opinion he was joined by
22:23Justice Scalia justice celo justice
22:25Thomas And Justice Kennedy and Justice
22:26Kagan was joined by Brier G B and S myor
22:30so broadly again you haven't read it and
22:31you don't want to comment too
22:33specifically but the do you think that
22:34public financing violates the
22:36Constitution well I hadn't thought so um
22:40many states have um given some of that
22:44and I think if I'm not mistaken West
22:47Virginia has recently adopted some form
22:52of Public Assistance to candidates as
22:56one of the remedies they didn't want to
22:58change their system but I think they did
23:01so this is going to come as a shock to
23:04some states who've adopted some aspect
23:07of public funding for judicial campaigns
23:11and I gather the denters feared that
23:13this might call into question Public
23:15Funding at the federal level too because
23:16the problem is if you just provide a
23:18lump sum President Obama could have
23:20gotten 105 million if he'd Forsworn
23:22public funds raising private funds he
23:24could get 745 million so it wasn't
23:26feasible for him to do it that's why
23:28Arizona and other states think you have
23:30to have a step up where you get more
23:32funds based on how much your opponent
23:34spends and without that might it be
23:36possible that the whole public financing
23:38system is is called into question well I
23:40don't know we'll find out but I'm I'm
23:42sorry that I didn't have the opinion in
23:45time to read it today to be
23:49prepared uh this comes against a
23:51backdrop as you know about uh a debate
23:53about the proper role of money and
23:55politics and that means that I have to
23:58ask about the next decision which is
24:00underlying all this which is the
24:01citizens united case in that case the
24:03court seemed to say that uh stopping the
24:06appearance of corruption is not a
24:08legitimate constitutional goal only
24:10quidd proquo corruption can be
24:12restricted and if that's true then most
24:14campaign Finance laws would be called
24:15into question I gather you don't you
24:17don't agree with that statement well I
24:19think that's a concern very much a
24:22concern as we look at these things the
24:25decision you're referring to Citizens un
24:29United uh was a concern to me because
24:32what it did was to recognize
24:37corporations as being fully protected by
24:40the First Amendment as much as an
24:42individual is and I thought that was a
24:46potential problem long term I very much
24:51doubt that the framers of the
24:53Constitution when they wrote the first
24:56amendment how did they word it now here
24:59where's my ver I keep it with me oh
25:02that's good we'll look at it I should
25:04have brought mine
25:05too
25:07um I don't think they had corporations
25:10in mind to tell you the truth let's see
25:13what you think when I read it to
25:16you Congress shall make no law
25:19respecting an establishment of religion
25:22or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
25:25or abridging the freedom of speech of
25:28the
25:30press or of the right of people
25:32peaceably to assemble and petition for
25:35grievances now I mean do you think they
25:37were thinking about corporations there
25:40or about us as
25:43individuals I sort of thought all
25:46along the framers of the
25:49Constitution were talking about the
25:51right of people individuals people not
25:55corporate entities so I've been pretty
25:58concerned about this whole
26:01approach you uh first of all I love to
26:03see you just quoting the text of the
26:05Constitution Justice black used to pull
26:07it out and say no law makes means no law
26:10but you read it and as common sense
26:12suggests corporations are not in there I
26:14would have thought so now you wrote an
26:16opinion uh uh in the 2003 mcon case I
26:20did write an opinion you wrote you wrote
26:22many superb opinions but this one came
26:24to the opposite conclusion to the
26:25citizens united case and you appell the
26:28parts of the McCain Finance law and you
26:30said many years ago we observed that to
26:31say congress is without power to pass
26:33appropriate legislation to safegard an
26:35election from the improper use of money
26:37to influence the result is to deny the
26:38nation in a vital particular the power
26:41of self- protection money like water
26:43will always find an outlet would you
26:45have voted the opposite way in citizens
26:47united no I thought I was right in
26:49citizens united in McConnell you were
26:51right but yes in McConnell so coming in
26:54citizens united the court uh in effect
26:58overrule that correct so you would have
27:00been on the other side so uh well yeah I
27:02mean I'll let my words speak for
27:05themselves in the earlier case that was
27:08my view but I don't think it's the view
27:10of the current
27:12Court um
27:15sadly and the idea that corporations
27:18have the same Free Speech rights as
27:20persons could have much broader
27:21implications yes it could so we'll see
27:24and you you have a pragmatic
27:26understanding of this you were the only
27:27member you were the last member of the
27:29Supreme Court to have been a practical
27:31serving politician as a as a former
27:33legislator what is the cost of striking
27:35down these very complicated nuanced
27:38practical regulations in the name of
27:40these abstractions about corporate
27:41speech well I guess we'll have to see
27:44over time but I think it's a concern um
27:47these things were enacted to try to
27:50preserve some semblance of having decent
27:54effective
27:55representation in our legislative bodies
27:58and making sure that it's possible for
28:01people to run even though they're not
28:04well-funded but have a an opponent who
28:07is extremely well funded that was the
28:09thinking I don't know how well they've
28:11worked but it looks like we're not going
28:13to have that anymore and you're also
28:16very concerned about public confidence
28:18in the Judiciary and in the political
28:19system very much so I just think
28:22um the framers put together a pretty
28:27decent form of government it was rather
28:29new at the time but they established the
28:33three branches of government that we
28:36know the executive the president the
28:39legislative branch and the judicial
28:42branch and when it came to the judges as
28:45I said before they didn't provide for
28:48the election of federal judges they
28:51provided for their appointment and
28:53that's how every one of the states
28:55started out but over time they've moved
28:59to this election of state judges and I
29:03don't think it has served the nation
29:05well I really don't but um I've spoken
29:09to a number of states that were
29:11considering a change the one of the
29:13recent ones was Nevada a neighbor of
29:17California and Arizona and Nevada had a
29:20proposition on the ballot to stop um to
29:25go to uh a system of appointing their
29:30judges instead of popular
29:32elections and um unfortunately it was
29:35defeated in the election and I was
29:38disappointed but um that was the voter's
29:41choice and my observation is that voters
29:46are reluctant to give up anything that
29:49they think is my right to vote I don't
29:51want to give that up so if the state has
29:54allowed the voters to vote for judges
29:57the voters ERS are not very eager to
30:00give up that right well this is very
30:03frustrating because if as you say the
30:04voters don't want to give up the right
30:06and the only system is the only
30:07alternative is public financing and the
30:09Supreme Court strikes down public
30:11financing triing that so we're kind of
30:12left with systems that need help what do
30:16we do well I hope States will reexamine
30:19it and maybe uh eliminate the election
30:22of Judges that's what I'd like to see
30:24happen I don't think we ought to be
30:26electing them at all when you were
30:28deciding these great cases like
30:30McConnell did you think about the
30:32Practical impact of these decisions and
30:34about public confidence and and all
30:35these important questions we're talking
30:36about well yes I tend to kind of think
30:39that way that's probably because of my
30:42experience at the state level and
30:45thinking problems through as I used to
30:47have to do as a legislator yes I'm
30:50inclined to do that and do you think
30:52that judges who haven't had that
30:54political experience who've been law
30:55professors uh for example as than half
30:58of this court is I'm sorry to report are
31:00they less likely to think in
31:02those they can think things through
31:04pretty ably yeah so my hope is that we
31:08will have judges and justices who do
31:12think through these issues and see them
31:14because they're per perfectly capable
31:17of understanding the problems and the
31:21issues the last time the court struck
31:23down lots of laws in the name of the
31:25rights of Corporations had got into some
31:27trouble this was in the 1930s when uh
31:29the New Deal was struck down and FDR
31:31threatened to pack the court and it
31:32backed away if this court strikes down
31:35uh campaign Finance laws in the name of
31:37the rights of Corporations possibly
31:39Health Care could we see a a return to
31:41the 1930s with the president fighting
31:44back and saying this is an activist
31:45court defending the corporations rather
31:47than the people oh I haven't seen signs
31:49of that
31:51yet I don't see that we need to make
31:54that
31:56speculation but
31:58would like to see more States uh
32:01reexamine their method of selecting
32:04judges and those that elect them think
32:08again about
32:09it and I and there's some uh cases on
32:13the other side in this uh AT&T case this
32:16year the court said that the Fifth
32:17Amendment rights of corporations are not
32:19the same as that of individuals so maybe
32:20they won't ride this particular horse
32:22all the way to the Stables we'll see
32:24well that would be an encouraging thing
32:28I hope maybe that's the case yeah um uh
32:33partisan gerrymandering is another
32:35problem with the electoral system that's
32:37along these lines and we've seen the
32:39fact that uh Representatives can
32:41basically choose their constituents has
32:43led to an awful lot of polarization
32:45because you only have to win the primary
32:47and you no longer have to move to the
32:48center you just play right or play left
32:50are you concerned about this problem in
32:51the public confidence that it inspires
32:54well I think every
32:56state is is confronted after a 10-year
33:00census with the problem of redrawing the
33:03boundaries of every legislative district
33:06every congressional district they have
33:08to redraw all the boundaries to try to
33:11make the populations equal if you have a
33:15state with uh five congressional
33:19districts you then the state has to see
33:22after the census is taken that the
33:25population in those five districts is
33:28basically equal and they have to do the
33:30same thing in their own State
33:32legislatures and that process is going
33:35on right now in all the states because
33:38we've completed the census and we know
33:40how many people there are I know what's
33:42going on in Arizona and it's going on
33:45here in this state and so on and how the
33:50states draw those lines um can make a
33:54difference in the outcome of Elections
33:56but one of the things things that um
33:59have been recognized as legitimate
34:01concerns in drawing the boundaries of
34:04for instance a legislative district is
34:08uh the um City boundaries or communities
34:15that don't want to be split up and one
34:18of the things that courts have upheld is
34:21drawing lines that protect the Integrity
34:24of the boundaries of a town or a city or
34:27some other community and so uh you're
34:30going to end up with some hard decisions
34:33when you draw these election
34:37districts um I don't know how to answer
34:39it they're challenged sometimes in the
34:43states where new districts are drawn and
34:46sometimes if they look too strange
34:48they're challenged you've seen districts
34:51drawn and we all have wasn't there one
34:54in Texas where uh the boundary of the
34:57District they drew they had a little
35:00narrow thing and then they had a tail
35:03that was several hundred miles long
35:05that's right they said if you drove down
35:07you drove down the district with both
35:08car doors open you'd kill the two people
35:10in the district right right I mean it
35:12was the strangest District boundary I've
35:15ever seen so sometimes the people
35:19charged with drawing the districts are
35:21doing some very weird things and to
35:24counteract these weird shapes I guess
35:26the best proposal is uh Merit District
35:29drawing they proposed that in California
35:31where a bipartisan commission would draw
35:32the district lines rather than having
35:34politicians do it but that went down to
35:36defeat maybe for the same reason that
35:37the judicial election was that defeated
35:41it was unfortunately for similar reason
35:42it's frustrating because you you almost
35:44feel that these good government reforms
35:45are being rejected by the voters and
35:47then the court strike strike down in
35:49Arizona we do have a bipartisan
35:51commission that's charged with drawing
35:54those boundaries and I think by and
35:57large they've tried to do a pretty good
35:59job I I didn't see any weird line
36:02drawing of the kind we've seen
36:05occasionally it seemed like the best
36:07solution yeah but broadly we see in this
36:09country such polarization in every
36:11aspect of politics and I'm often struck
36:13by the fact that when you were on the
36:15court you were able to express a sort of
36:17moderate sensibility of the majority of
36:19the country better than these polarized
36:21legislators and I do not see that on the
36:22court today which is very
36:24distressing I think we do have issues
36:28um in the country today of
36:31polarization
36:32um I think we need to learn to get to
36:36know each other and work better together
36:39let me uh mention for instance how
36:43Congress operates
36:47um Congress members of Congress arrive
36:50in Washington on Tuesday morning even if
36:54they live as far away as Alaska they
36:57they get there Tuesday morning and
37:00they're available in Washington and
37:02their offices Tuesday afternoon all day
37:05Wednesday Thursday morning and they all
37:07leave Thursday
37:09afternoon now believe me that does not
37:12leave time to get to know each other not
37:15even the members of your own party much
37:19less the members of the other party and
37:22I know how this works because when I was
37:24in the state senate in Arizona I had a
37:28majority of one for my party that meant
37:32that um I had to find supporters on the
37:35other side of the aisle for most pieces
37:38of legislation or you weren't going to
37:40get it passed and I had to get to know
37:44and make friends with people on both
37:47sides of the aisle Republicans and
37:50Democrats and we used to have potluck
37:53dinners at my house and I'd fix some
37:56chalupas and we we' get some
37:58beer and we'd invite all the legislators
38:02all of them both parties and we would
38:05have a nice time it would be a good
38:07chance to get acquainted and make
38:09friends and believe me I could
38:13get enough votes on most of the
38:16legislation that we had to pass once in
38:18a while there'd be one that was so
38:20partisan you couldn't but by and large
38:23because we knew each other we could get
38:27these things passed and that doesn't
38:29happen in Congress today and I think if
38:32I were in Congress today one of the
38:34things that I would
38:36propose is uh to
38:39require that members of Congress are
38:43there three weeks out of the month then
38:45let them stay home a week and do their
38:48campaigning but the rest of the time
38:50Monday through Saturday make them be
38:53there I think maybe they'd get
38:55acquainted again and that that wouldn't
38:57be all bad and should President Obama
39:00invite the House Majority Leader over
39:02for homemade
39:04chalupas well I don't know if that's
39:06going to help you need the whole bunch
39:09maybe you'd have to ask everybody but
39:11that wouldn't be a bad idea either there
39:13was more of that and this is not
39:15frivolous concern you're raising in the
39:17old days the the president would invite
39:19the whole Supreme Court over after the
39:20steel seizure decision Harry Truman was
39:22really angry with the court and he inv
39:25invited them all over to his uh Hugo
39:26Black and invited Truman over to his
39:28house and they sat around and Truman was
39:30sulking and finally uh he said Hugo I
39:32don't think much of your law but by
39:34golly this bourbon's pretty good yes
39:36that's right should we go back to
39:37chalupas and bourbon I mean do you think
39:39you think that there should be more of
39:40this face Toof face contact that in
39:42every legislative branch there should be
39:46mechanisms to enable the members to get
39:48to know each other on a personal level
39:51and to make some friends and in the case
39:53of Congress I think it would re mean
39:55requiring them to stay there
39:57part of every month but anyway now are
40:00we going to let people ask questions if
40:02they want to um I think that's a
40:04Judicial order so I I I'll take my I
40:07thought that was part of the deal your
40:09your timing is better than mine and this
40:10is exactly the right moment to ask for
40:12questions so ladies and gentlemen but we
40:14need lights on so I can see the people
40:16out there somebody just turned all the
40:18lights off so I couldn't see but let's
40:21let people ask
40:23questions yes good idea your honor um I
40:27know and appreciate and respect that
40:29you're reluctant to talk about the court
40:32um but I'm sort of going back to the
40:34West Virginia case that you cited and I
40:36wonder whether the concerns that you had
40:39about that might also apply to the
40:42concerns that we're seeing more and more
40:43of where several members of the Court
40:46seem to be um frustratingly close to uh
40:50uh Financial sources that support
40:54litigant well I don't know about that I
40:56don't know what you're referring to well
40:59what I'm referring to what I'm referring
41:00to is the stories in the Press about
41:02Justice Thomas And Justice Scalia who
41:05have who have received what appear to be
41:08benefits uh in the form of invitations
41:11and in the form of of support for uh for
41:14large programs that uh that they're
41:16Associated or interested in oh I think
41:18you're probably talking about some
41:20critical articles because one or more of
41:23them went to one or more events
41:25sponsored by a particular interest group
41:29or
41:31money
41:32Mone to ra or raise money for for the
41:36for the group the gentleman was saying
41:37that that uh that the claim is that the
41:39justices might have helped to
41:40participate in the fundraising of well I
41:42don't think it's um allowed for federal
41:46judges to participate in raising money
41:49so if that's the allegation it could be
41:52pursued that's not
41:54allowed so if there are complaints they
41:57they could certainly be
41:59made yes first of all thank you very
42:02much for first year service on the court
42:04and for what you're doing now um and
42:06would you tell us uh about the project
42:09that you have with um schools and civic
42:12education oh I and also tell us please
42:14how we can get that into our own
42:16communities well thank you for asking me
42:19now she's not prompted but I wish I
42:22had um when I retired from the court it
42:27was because my husband had Alzheimer's
42:29and he had reached the
42:31stage where I simply couldn't take care
42:33of him at home he needed some nursing
42:36care and I thought it was better that he
42:38go to a place in Arizona where two of
42:41our three children live and
42:43grandchildren were there and we could
42:45arrange visits and that was better so I
42:47stepped down
42:50and
42:52um I think that worked out pretty well
42:56but you wanted to know
42:59about this teaching so I participated in
43:04setting up a conference at Georgetown
43:07law school and I got the help of Justice
43:10Brier and a couple of the other justices
43:13and we tried to invite some thoughtful
43:16people from all across the United States
43:19to come to that conference and we talked
43:22about all the criticism being made of
43:25Judges I mean it was pretty bad Congress
43:29was proposing various bills to impeach
43:32any judge who ever cited a foreign
43:35judgment in the judge's opinion I mean
43:38there were all kinds of bills being
43:40proposed in Congress and at the state
43:42level too do you remember South Dakota
43:45they had a ballot proposition for voters
43:48in South Dakota called jail for judges
43:52and if you went to court in South Dakota
43:54and lost your case you could turn around
43:56and sue the judge and try to send him to
43:59jail because you lost your case now how
44:02do you like that so I thought we really
44:05needed to talk about you know what was
44:07driving all this unhappiness with judges
44:10and we had a very good conference it was
44:13really marvelous and we broke up into
44:16small discussion groups and so forth and
44:18the consensus of the group was lack of
44:22education and understanding of the role
44:25of Courts
44:27and that we don't appreciate we're not
44:30understanding we're not well enough
44:32educated today about how courts work and
44:35I quite agree
44:37so I helped start a website and it's
44:42called
44:44icivics.org Little
44:46icivics.org and we aimed it at young
44:50people Middle School to early high
44:52school and we got some MacArthur genius
44:56Award winners ERS to help us design some
44:59games that the young people could play
45:03on a computer they could just go dial up
45:05this thing and play games games that
45:07would teach them how government worked
45:10and we started out with the judicial
45:12branch to teach them how courts worked
45:15and develop some games to do that but we
45:18decided gosh we've got these other two
45:21branches maybe we better not ignore them
45:24so we have expanded and we Now cover all
45:27three branches of government and the
45:29games are fabulous I hope some of you
45:32will dial up icivics.org and see what we
45:36have and young people get on and they
45:38love them and they'll play the games and
45:40they'll play with others and they learn
45:43without knowing they're learning they're
45:45just having a good time but in fact
45:47they're learning so we're trying to get
45:49them used in schools all across the
45:51country and I have chair people in all
45:5450 states and if any of you want to help
45:57me let me know I'll tell you how you can
46:00we have a question over here so Justice
46:04because you are the only female that has
46:08a law school named after her yes do you
46:12feel that women will take a different
46:16stance than men on the judicial
46:21system and if that would be the case
46:25would there be more
46:27compassion for things that pertain to
46:30women Children and Families I don't know
46:34that's hard to say I I don't think we
46:37have found an area where we can say oh
46:40yes they're women so we're going to do X
46:43it doesn't usually work that way on the
46:46major issues we find that both sexes end
46:50up being able to discuss issues for
46:53rational reasons and not just
46:55gender-based reasons so I'm not sure
46:58that it makes any difference and I was
47:00honored to have the law school name for
47:03me it seems so strange to me to go to
47:06Temp Arizona and see Sandra de o Conor
47:09college of law but there it is and it's
47:12doing well and it has both women and men
47:15students and they both seem to like to
47:17go there so I guess it's working out all
47:20right we have another question over
47:23here Justice OK Conor U also thank you
47:26for doing this um you've provided
47:29leadership all your life in fact you
47:30could be argu you provided breakthrough
47:33leadership could you share with us what
47:35you've learned about leadership and
47:37perhaps answer or offer a view as to
47:40whether or not leaders can be made or do
47:42they have to be
47:47born I would think that there is a tiny
47:53element in US of
47:58our basic makeup as an individual
48:01whether we uh like to work with groups
48:05whether we like to try to um persuade
48:09people to do things or not some people
48:12don't like that role and don't want to
48:15work in groups so perhaps some of what
48:18we are is we're born with in terms of
48:24qualities that can be helpful to a
48:27uh they're not perhaps essential but an
48:31interest in working with other people
48:34and
48:35communicating with them and trying to
48:37get a consensus is a help for somebody
48:40who wants to be a leader but we can
48:43certainly
48:44teach anyone who has an interest how to
48:48do it better we certainly can do that
48:50and I hope we can and will so thanks for
48:54asking all right we all set we have
48:59another questioner over here just as a
49:02question to the polarization issue in
49:05the federal level not the state level
49:07has polarization politicized the
49:10judicial appointment system to the place
49:12where it's become ineffective in
49:17executing well I don't think that it has
49:22uh at the federal level as I've already
49:25told you all all the federal judges are
49:28selected by the president appointed by
49:30him with the advice and consent of the
49:33Senate now does a president care about
49:37the political party of the person being
49:40appointed well they do care George
49:43Washington
49:44cared and so does Obama and so did
49:47Ronald Reagan so you know I think that's
49:50a part of the system but uh even uh a
49:56member of one political party as
49:58president will occasionally appoint
50:00someone of the other party we haven't
50:02seen that lately but it's happened in
50:05the past so it
50:07can and we certainly know that it
50:12happens even today at the lower court
50:16level it's more AP to than at the
50:18Supreme Court level where it gets so
50:20much media attention and at the district
50:24court and court of appeals levels I
50:26think you will find some appointment of
50:29members of the of a political party not
50:32the president's party in almost every
50:35Administration to some extent so I don't
50:38think that's been a major problem for us
50:41but at the top level I think Politics
50:45the
50:46political registration of a nominee is
50:50probably of interest to most of the
50:53presidents who make those appointments
50:57but we've survived it's been okay
51:00through the years I think we've had a
51:02pretty good record at this supreme court
51:05I think yes your honor it's been a
51:08pleasure to listen to you discuss some
51:09of the legal aspects but it's also very
51:11delightful to hear these little nuggets
51:12about you chalupa beer video gaming Etc
51:16and I'm wondering now that you're
51:17retired and you've had a chance to
51:18really kind of take a deep breath and
51:20see the world around you from Arizona if
51:22not from Washington um can you give me
51:25an indication of leaders that are
51:28appealing to you and also Trends in our
51:30society that really catch your
51:34attention well I don't know about
51:36leaders because I don't watch what
51:38happens in other states all that closely
51:41to be able characteristics of leadership
51:43that are really catching your attention
51:45right now what is it characteristics of
51:47leadership
51:48characteristics well I like to
51:52support when I have a chance to do so
51:56people in leadership positions who have
52:00um a pretty good broad
52:03education and who who are able to see
52:06both sides of issues that they're going
52:09to have to decide someone who has the
52:12comprehension and ability to consider
52:16the arguments on both sides of the
52:18issues they'll have to decide and we
52:21hope that we can select the person who
52:24will make a wise decision at the end of
52:27the day having heard both sides of the
52:31arguments that's what we look for in
52:33leaders and I hope we can continue to
52:36find them I don't know when you vote
52:38what you look for but that's one of the
52:41things I look for and then the follow-up
52:44question for you was in terms of
52:45societal changes I mean re mentioning
52:48video gaming as an educational tools or
52:50anything else that you're seeing that
52:52that really catches your attention and
52:54you you're impressed with oh any well
52:57yes I mean I just selected that because
53:00I think
53:01that one of the things when we started
53:04our country we public school education
53:08was not one of the things the framers
53:10wrote Into the Constitution it wasn't
53:13part of the design and it wasn't until
53:16the 1800s maybe 1830s about that people
53:21began to realize good Heavens we've got
53:24to do something we should have public
53:26schools in this country to teach young
53:28people how our government works if we
53:30don't do that we're not going to be able
53:32to maintain this government that was
53:34formed for us and that was absolutely
53:37right that was a sound idea to get
53:41public schools to try to educate every
53:44one of our young citizens about how our
53:47system works and that's why we started
53:49them and it's critically important that
53:52we maintain good schools that can do
53:55that and it's it's hard to do these days
53:58I'm just I read with
54:01dismay the poor performance of American
54:05students today compared with those of
54:07other nations there's a brand new survey
54:10out and we participated with maybe 30
54:14other nations we're down close to the
54:18bottom on almost every area of study
54:21with our students it's heartbreaking
54:24we're not doing well in any area area
54:27and we've been concentrating you know on
54:30um Math and Science but so far it hasn't
54:33turned things around and I don't know
54:36how we're going to the one common
54:40thread that people say they see in
54:45looking at the various Nations the ones
54:47that have the highest
54:50performance results for
54:52students and ours is the quality of the
54:56teach teachers they're using and when
54:58you get really top-notch teachers
55:01apparently you're getting a better
55:03result and maybe we better really make a
55:07huge effort in this country to get the
55:10very best teachers we
55:12can um I don't know I'd love to have
55:15others with a critical eye look at these
55:18new reports and see what you think but
55:21um we've got to do something in this
55:23country we're not doing what we should
55:26and and of all none of our 50 states did
55:29very well as compared to other countries
55:32and other um contestants in this test
55:37and the one state that did the best but
55:39it wasn't night and day was
55:43massachusett um certainly it wasn't
55:46Arizona that's for sure okay well now
55:49time for maybe one more question then
55:51we're going to open it up for uh this
55:54next event that's taking place your
55:56honored thank you for being here uh
55:58question about the individual mandate
56:00within the healthc care law it's
56:02obviously there's a lot of cases going
56:03around in the United States challenging
56:05the president's Healthcare law
56:06specifically the individual mandate for
56:08all intents and purposes it looks like
56:09this is going to end up in the Supreme
56:10Court how do you think the court will
56:12view the I hav any idea I haven't I
56:14don't know what's the details of that
56:16law and I wouldn't Hazard a guess thank
56:20you thank you for trying that was a good
56:21try all right
56:23okay well let me I'll ask one last
56:25question Maybe you can answer uh first
56:28of all ladies and gentlemen you've seen
56:29in this conversation how much the
56:31country has lost when Justice okon
56:33resigned from the Supreme Court no
56:36no
56:38no and and in that spirit I want you
56:41just lost a cowgir that's what you lost
56:43that's not true but but as as we've been
56:45as we've been discussing some of your
56:47greatest opinions have been overturned
56:49or under constitutional pressure in
56:51campaign finance and affirmative action
56:53and religion what are what is your
56:55favorite opinion the one that meant the
56:57most to you and are you concerned that
56:58it might be overturned no I'm not going
57:00to answer that I thought that was a
57:02relative soft well that's the first part
57:04what's your favorite opinion you can
57:05answer no sure you must have some you
57:07make good ones I tried to do the best
57:11job I could with each one that came to
57:13me and it's pretty hard to do it's hard
57:17ladies and gentlemen as you've seen
57:19Justice oconor asks questions but she
57:21will not answer them when she doesn't
57:22want to please join me in thanking this
57:24remarkable all right thank you than

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Insight and Ideas: Money, Politics, and Judicial Elections by The Aspen Institute, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 8,654 words across 1,258 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.