James rosen, we are talking to you on publication day. Congratulations on your new biography of Antonin Scalia, scalia rise to greatness. He was putting on a show, but it was a great show. Why did you choose that quote, and how does it embody Antonin Scalia i . I chose that quote from Antonin Scalias youngest child, the fourth of his four daughters, make cilia, because meg scalia, she said that because he was largerthanlife, to all of us. And then you see in the epigraph, my conservation to this was to ask, he was cognizant that it was largerthanlife. And she said oh yes, he was putting on a show, but it was a great show. Throughout the book, his nickname which conjures up a bold fighter in the rain, despite that he was wellliked. How did he pull off both of these ideas . Scalia had an amazing mind and a crackling wit, and great personal affability. I like to say he was the kid from queens. He grew up on the streets of queens, so he combined and earthy county america chart with an ivy league intellect. And at times he was capable of grandeur, he would shame week shamefully, your piano and start belting out this was carols or showtunes. But at the same time of selfdeprecation and it was a very winning combination. Even when he was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1986, there were certain other circumstances such as the elevation of William Rehnquist and what that would mean. He was elevated 980. The perfection of that boat bothered him, and you can hear him complaining about it as late as 2005. Lets make it a hundred. Why did it bother him . The whole story begins with a previously unpublished account from john bolton, who was a young Reagan Justice department eight at the time, who had to inform scalia of the vote, which are quite special beings because he was a social animal and out on the rubber chicken circuit. John bolton had to find a telephone to tracking him down and deliver the news. And he said congratulations, you have been confirmed, 980. And the battle to get request confirmed from associate justice to chief justice had been successful and arduous that 98 980 was looking good to everyone on the conversation process. On the other line he said something there was silence. Still he asked who didnt vote . Well it was Barry Goldwater and a senator from utah. But isnt this great, you got confirmed. You got confirmed. There was silence and then be. You told me that we couldnt get these two republican nominees yet, at this point bolton told me he got a little irritated and he said concentrating, you know, you have just been confirmed 980, goldwater had gone home sick on the night of the vote, and the utah senator was donating his kidney to his daughter. And finally scalia says thats right, thank you. This is part of how we talked about that he suffers losses he carries us with him. Talk about that later. And when i came back to washington as a reporter in 1999, the first thing i did was right to justice Antonin Scalia and request an interview on fox news. In 1999, fox news was not as wellknown as it would later become. It was not the industry leader. We got confused for but i went out and said that i was offended fox news, he said that he was a fan, but he said that he will does not make himself a spectacle. And i wrote back and i said thank you. But what else could it have been but a spectacle when a sitting Supreme Court justice had gone to the 1980s, which is when i first became aware of him, participating in a pbs program called the constitution, delicate balance where he sits with figures like gerald ford and dan rather and so on to discuss hypothetical situations and how he would deal with them with cameras present and fully with them. And he wrote back and this is where to receive from Antonin Scalia, Supreme Court stationary, i was 30 at the time. You are right. I probably should not have done the constitution and delicate balance despite the fact that i was a friend of the president of cbs news. But we had to off the record of changes, one where we drank wine at his favorite italian restaurant, and he insisted that i eat off his plate. So im shoveling vegetables on his plate, he took me back to his office in his car, and his clerks attested that could be a dicey situation, which i witnessed. And the contents of those ledges will remain off the record as they were intended. But the amusing correspondence that went on for two years and which points at various points he said things to me like you really know how to hurt a fellow. That will be in volume two. Scalia rise to greatness, 19361986, tells the story of his first 15 50 years. Hopefully 50 years from now we will tell the stories of his Supreme Court tenure. How long have you been working on it . Not counting all of the time spent up to now, five years. I just want to stick with that idea of your request. All of those years at the lower court and the high court, he would never allow cspan cameras into his speeches and sometimes organizers of events was say yes and then we would get the word you cannot cover Antonin Scalias speech, but was that all about . What was that all about . If you look at the archives you will see numerous interactions between scalia and his students that whereby cspan. He was not uniform. But he was asked many times by his lifelong friend, no stranger to the fears of his channel about antipathy his antipathy to cameras in the courts. Where the courts were considered and concerned and where the Supreme Court was concerned, scalia felt that while some small segment of the American People would watch gaveltogavel proceedings of the Supreme Court, despite their intrinsic dullness for nonlawyers, most would not. And if there would be a soundbite that would distort the meaning of what they do and reduce it to the most sensational news headline and such. That was the basis for his opposition to cameras in the court. He did not get to get into it at times with embers of the press and famously injected or have confiscated i think typical orders of some reporters or student reporters at one of his events, which will be covered in. 2. An interviewee for this book Justice Scalia very well and said that Justice Scalia knew he had gone too far medication. One last question about structure. Throughout the book you make reference with what feels like a rebuttal to prior biographies, particularly one in one in particular. Why did you do that yet, . I consider this the first accurate portrayal of Antonin Scalia a imprint because it is the first admiring biography of him. They were to existing biographies about Justice Scalia that were published during his lifetime, what of them he cooperated extensively with, the other was one that came out two years later with which he did not cooperate at all, despite the extensive cooperation granted to the first, her book like professor murphys, turned out at the end to be contemptuous of scalias jurisprudence and his philosophy and his conduct on the bench. At almost every face and chapter of his life he is given short shrift or interpreted in the most mendacious light. This benefits from an anonymous wealth of personal documentary sources that were previously unavailable. In giving an accurate account of scalias life up to the age of 50, occasionally it addresses how the previous biographers treated various key phases and events and episodes in scalias life and shows how often they were inaccurate. Lets get into his life. He was born in 1936, what is important to know about his early life . He was born in Trenton New Jersey but moved when he was five to queens new york. And if that is one detail right there that the previous cop biographers both got wrong. This books make book makes use of a secret oral history that he conducted in chambers at the Supreme Court in 1992, while sitting on the court, that was only recently unsealed and he makes it clear he moved when he was five. The previous biographers had it differently. He loves queens, he played all kinds of sports in the streets, stickball, basketball. His parents, his father was an italian immigrant who came here with 400 in his pocket and not speaking english from sicily in 1920. He wound up becoming a professor of romance like witches at a college for 30 years. Scalias mother was the daughter of italian immigrants born in new york city. She was also an Elementary School teacher. There were devout catholics. This book is really the first to explore the depths and devotion of his catholic faith and how it influenced him as he rose to the court. From his immersion in catholicism, he was top in his class at jesuitrun institutions, especially at a rare jesuit military kit college. With his two lips at the hand of his teacher parents, and particularly his father, who is a romance like witches professor who had an innate distrust of translation, and any kind of effort to mess with the text of something, scalia emerged with a reference for text and the miller immutability of certain sacred text. And i think he carried that with him into his practice of law. He was a prevatican ii catholic. What does that mean in terms of how he practiced his faith and his beliefs vatican ii was a series of changes that was enacted by the vatican seen by many traditionalists as liberalizing the church unduly, and Antonin Scalia up like another of my subjects, william f buckley, were both devout catholics. Both of them preferred the highlight in mass, which was sort of ancient and original form of the ceremony. Vatican ii discourage that. One of scalias daughters tells the story in the book, that when they lived in chicago and it was sunday in the early 80s, they were having adventures because to professor scully at that time, he would drive half hours through anything in order to deliver his nine children to a highlight and mask as opposed to any old mass. He have a relationship with opus dei . He did not with himself, but some of his nearest friends and one person who i interviewed who does not show in volume one but will be in volume two, was an opus dei priest who described himself to me as if scalias spiritual advisor when he was a justice on the court. And with whom scalia retreats periodically. Scalias catholicism is central to his identity, and he himself in that secret oral history conducted in 1992 dismissed the idea that his training at the hand of the jesuits shaped decisively his jurisprudential philosophy of text to listen. One of his biographers believed that, and i think that previous accounts have not taken sufficient account of his catholic faith. But he resisted the idea that he was crafting his faith onto his judicial decisions and opinions. It famously said there is no such thing as a catholic hamburger. He said the closest way, the closest thing to a catholic hamburger we have is a hamburger that is perfect they may. We talk about one of those disappointments, such as his application to princeton where he was not accepted. Why did that sting him so much echo . Scalia had demonstrated in academic record that was truly superlative in every respect. And was active in activities, he had a theatrical streak, he performed in that beth and other place and acted alongside Eileen Brennan who went on to fame in private benjamin and other movies, it was kind of a shock to him not to be admitted to princeton. He later said it was one of the few times in his life where he felt the presence of prejudice against his italianamerican roots. It felt that in the interview with the Princeton Alumni they sort of communicative to him and in her mind that he was that the princeton sort. He said that in the oral history and he said that what was met by not the princeton sort, not w asp enough, not the right ethnic background. He came overcame that and went to Harvard Law School and goes to harvard for his proud parents in queens, it was quite something. s second choice was georgetown under the jesuits and with socratic method. You write was a different school, then. And he learned that he should approach all his earthly endeavors from the perspective of devout catholic system. Can you tell me more about that . If you look at the cure books from his time in georgetown, jack yearbooks from his time in georgetown, its wildly different than it is from today. There were marchers in the ropes by catholic priests and clergy and the faculty that the students witnessed at the very beginning of the semester and so on. Scalia ate all of that up. He was grateful for the jesuit influence the rest of his i think he was dismayed that the nature of jesuit practice changed over time and became in his view less rigorous. More committed to what might be considered liberal ideologies. He was valedictorian and you said that he was considered appropriate priesthood after he graduated but instead chose law school at harvard. There you write it was the end incubator of his originalism. Lets talk about originalism with Antonin Scalia a. What does that mean for him. As judge scalia on the d. C. Circuit court of a p a, one robot run below the Supreme Court, launched a revolution in how judges pursue their business. What is the Central Business of a charge . They interpret constitutional provision judge . They interpret constitutional provision and argue over the law, whether between the government in a corporation or individuals and turned to the courts and say what does the law mean from their different perspectives scalias approach to what we would call statutory interpretation, the Central Business of the judge is to interpret a law means, was originalism. It was a revolution when he came along, because until he came along, then prepared prevailed what liberals called the living constitution, the idea that the constitution is a living, breathing document that expands as needed. And as interpreted by judges and justices. To accommodate modern phenomenon that the Founding Fathers never could have envisioned suggestive their weapons or the internet. Scalia stood up for all that. Apart from that. He looked for things that were extraneous, the original tent behind the law, not just the text. What did they meet, what did they say in their debates on the house floor, what did they commit in their putting the committee reports. Scalia said all that is extraneous. If you want to note the original intent of the Founding Fathers, have a president who signed a law into law, take a look at the text. That is the intent. To find the original meeting of a law, which is what a judge is supposed to do, scalia said look at the text. If the text is vague, lets look at tradition and practice. Today, very few lawyers when they are arguing cases before the Supreme Court or submitting their briefs, begin with some discussion of legislative history and what the intent of the legislature was. They begin, as he urged, with a consideration of the text in original meaning. To the point where even Supreme Court justices, who had great friendships with Antonin Scalia up just like with Bader Ginsburg at ruth gator bait ruth Bader Ginsburg had, it influenced the way judges worked and courts worked, in every way of american life. That alone makes scalia one of the most important americans of the last 100 years. Two sides of the same coin. You can dance in the head of a pin with this. There are many views on this. My view on this is that where the constitution and its divisions were concerned, and ditto for statute passed a year ago, 10 years ago, 50 years ago, scalias approach was the same. He wanted to know what the original meeting was. What was it understood to mean at the time, that is the original meeting meeting. The first resort is the text. I say that textualism is what he used. He was introduced to maureen mccarthy, and proposed 90 days after they met. They had not spent a whole lot of time together because he was coming for finals as a harvard law students student. Maureen is a central character in this book, scalia rise to greatness. The former secretary of labor, their son, said to me, their oldest son and noted attorney in his own right, said to meet you are writing a book about my father. And he said there are a lot of Supreme Court justices who made a mark. But i cannot think of too many other people i could point to who did what my mom did, meaning Maureen Scalia, as that justice himself like to say, he raised this these kids with little help from me. And he said that i tended to handle the constitution, she handled everything else. It was an extraordinary burden, they raised nine children. It was not a nonentity, not in nonfigure, he was a very handson dad. He was home for dinner every night as he made clear to me. But he, it was Maureen Scalia who really raised the kids day today and knew their teachers were and make sure they associated with the right kids, and looked after their clothes, and asks gilly career vices, as we track his progress, we see that his work inevitably requires more absences from home traveling to conferences, speaking on this panel and what have you, and just in the year 1976, when the kids ranging in age from eight to less than a year old to 25 years of age, he would be overweight for 60 away for 60 days at a time. These are the hardest days for Maureen Scalia. But she really deserves a biography in her own right, she is an American Hero with how she writes that family. What was the essence of their elation ship, what brought them together . One of their daughters stated that marine scalia was as smart as or dare i say even smarter than by dad. She was his intellectual equal and she was a very formidable character. But they agreed on so much, they were both devout catholics. They were looking for the same things out of life. The fact that they had so many children is partly a reflection of the fact that scalia himself was an only child, where there were nine brothers and sisters that could have made children and only his parents did. There was an element of isolation to his existence. He said that he wanted a baseball team. He would joke that there were they were just too catholics plain feta kimberlite. That a kindred roulette. He spent six years and during this. Is political conservatism became apparent. Tell me about his conservatism. Scalia was described as a bill buckley type of conservative. This he never talked about bill buckley all that much, but i think he learned a thing or two, from this man who made conservatism palatable with his wit and debating style. It took that to heart and even our is one of his most famous lines for one of his decisions in 1990. He stated that it was a case that came out of kansas and the justices on this court are no better equipped to decide matters of life and death then 90 picked up people picked randomly from the telephone directory. Buckley used to live in the 61 said that i would sooner be apply governorship to the first 400 names of the phone book then someone elected by committee. He learned how to be a charming conservative and when audiences overwhelm arguing a conservative position. That was evident to his classmates early on. One of them said he was already conservative at the age of 17. He know what he believed and the rightness of what he believed and knew that he belonged at the Supreme Court. Did he considers himself a partisan recollection considers him consider himself a partisan republican . He understood about that that about himself, and then realize that he was not responsible for advancing those beliefs. He understood that the job is to interpret what the law mean. Used in the original and textual list lends to pursue that. He taught law for four years and you write that there can be no reckoning with his jurisprudence or conduct on the Court Without an understanding of his academic career. Why backup . Let me tell you about jones book. She deserves credit for building the template of the biography. She gets a lot onto the record in that first book. Flawed though it is. It is her credit. That book to votes very little, and the same for professor murphy spoke, to scalias academic career, which was a very tumultuous time in the late 60s and early 70s. There was campus unrest at the time that scalia taught there. First of all one half percent that the sheer joy in debate that scalia took and was never more evident than in his classrooms, his early teaching at uva, one student told me, i interviewed four or five of his students that when he was teaching contracts lost to leah would literally run from one side of the state the other to assume the role of the two warring parties who were disputing a contract, and would shout from one side to the other. And scalia i think recoiled from the excesses of the student Antiwar Movement of the late 60s, the unrest, taking law into your own hands, silencing debate, and all that shaped him in ways that made him a better judge and a better justice. So you really can understand how he became who he was with when you understand his academic career. He was working for the office of telecommunication policy. What was his job yet, . It was working for tom whitehead, a genius and a visionary, who had degrees from Massachussetts Institute of technology. The Nixon White House asked whitehead to create a new agency called the White House Office of telecommunications policy. One of the earliest employees there was the general counsel, 35yearold intimate scalia. And another of the early employees are was a young fellow not long out of purdue called brian lamb who was a Congressional Liaison and Communications Officer for this White House Office, hank can medication policy. This was formed by whitehead and enlisted the evil genius of scalia to bring coherence to what had been scattered and messy process of forging ahead on telecommunications policy. At the very time when there was a revolution bombing in that field. Whitehead and scalia apply freemarket economics to the launching of domestic space satellites and they secured a legal opinion that it was lawful to do so from the attorneys general, William Rehnquist. This is one of the documents that was revealed for the first time, and exchange between the two of them, the only time when scalia tasks rehnquist with delivering an opinion. The ingestion of freemarket principles into satellites on the ship Telecom Revolution. And in early writings of scalias, which had never been published before, we see him predicting the internet and the privacy applications that arise from the internet. And so much else. It was a formative time in scalias career, because he was in washington in the executive branch and duking it out with members of congress and rival agencies that did not like their particular prescriptions for telecoms, but they were throwing around terms that would not escape most americans lives for another 20 years, like share computer network. He presided over the connection of two pentagon Communication Systems that did not interface that point and he rejoiced that this key indication system is now interoperable. He was present at the creation of the Telecom Revolution and understood its indication and got technology. Where was he during watergate yeah, . X he had been serving as the chair of the administrative conference of the United States, a think tank agency for the executive branch that recommends reforms for the regulatory agencies of the executive branch. He had a good record of reforms that were enacted there. He was nominated by president lake in a sit in the last days to take the job, a very important job, called the president s lawyers lawyer. They delivered the legal opinions that save whether the executive branch can do this or not do that. Unfortunately for scalia, nixon resigned before the senate could act on the nomination. He was nominated by president ford. He liked to say that his commission was in the collectors item. During that job, scalia in the 1970s in the postwatergate era served as the president s lawyer lawyers lawyer. He and other conservatives such as dick cheney and to donald rumsfeld, who worked in the ford administration, were committed to preserving the powers of the presidency, against greedy and reckless assaults from members of congress, the media and others, who were trying to new to the presidency after watergate. Neutered the presidency after watergate. The people he worked with included the famous chow chow, and they did not attend their fortunes to richard nixon. They understood after the scandal would fade from view, the country would need a strong executive. Step scalia testified on the hill a lot, there is a lot of backandforth from that time, as many people did not match his intellect. Scalia also during this time played a very Important Role in reforming the Intelligence Community, and setting the rules of the road after watergate for the Intelligence Community he was even called upon to give approval on april 30, 1975, for the evacuation of our personnel from the embassy in South Vietnam by helicopter. Because they wanted to know if it was legal to do under the work powers war powers act, that was one of his cameos, was of his work on classified material is still classified, but he played a key role in covert operations, and in reforming the Intelligence Community in that time with all these published writings also in the book. Lewis we will be hearing him in his own words. He testified on his first skate case before the Supreme Court. Is only Supreme Court as an advocate. Its an audio clip, just a minute long, lets listen. Mr. Chief justice and may please the court. Due to it. As the amicus in this case is preserving the vitality of a legal document which is not itself an issue in the case. But the opinion of the court below is accepted by this court, which would effectively be destroyed. I refer of course to the restrictive doctrine of sovereign immunity. If the theory of active state that respondent is arguing in this case, is adopted, then we can accept expect training you should nations to use it where they use sovereign immunity, which is wherever they wish not to be held liable. How then, can one avoid this absurd result . [end video clip] he emerged from this oral argument bloody but victorious, what were the takeaways . This is the first recording of him of any kind, when he turned 40. He had appeared as a student on quiz shows and answer programs and debate, not of those idioms or the films of those appearances survive. This is the earliest recording event of scalia. He looked back on this experience and he noted how he was able to go eight minutes into his presentation before the Supreme Court arguing and amicus brief, meaning that the government was not a party to the case, they are just offering a friend of the Court Opinion on how the justices should rule, that he went eight minutes without anybody interrupting him. He did not like sitting there and reading the brief. He wanted to mix it up and that is what he would practice on the Supreme Court in terms of oral argument. He said lets argue it out. He went eight minutes without being asked anything and that unnerved him. We did not. In his clip, and the first person to address him is thurgood marshall. And marshall asked a somewhat imprecise question and it set scalia stammering. He was just kind of flustered. And he does not move apart from this the imposition of the line of questioning persists before scalia is able to refocus it. What i say that he emerged bloodied but unbound, the government one or the side that the government was favoring one the two justices sided with scalias argument. But he realized, i think, from that defense, that he had to be, even though as skilled as he was from his years as a High School Student through cost law school that he had room to grow and improve. When met by an inscrutable or unintelligible adversary or argument, the need of the person on the part of the argument is to put it back on track. After joe ford lost the election in 1970 six, scalia went back to teaching at chicago law, but also teaching at the American Enterprise institute. He was very visible, writing, speaking panels, and that would provide a lot of material for people doing research on a possible information process. Was he building his case during that time. . . In the existing biographical literature, there is what i call the careerist narrative. The idea that in his earliest pronouncements, writings and opinions, he was engaged in some kind of relate this campaign to advertise to powerful people, whether cheney and rumsfeld or president reagan that he was reliable and could be relied upon to deliver the right opinions. I interviewed people all across his career and they used a barnyard epithet for that analysis, and deleting scalias rise was not the product of careerist coming over bending his opinions or tearing his opinions to suit a presumed powerful individual. Scalia believed what he believed and it was rooted in his catholicism and his law school training, and his belief in the separation of powers and the role of a limited judiciary. And so i dont take he was advertising when he was at university of chicago. He was, as you say, creating a pilot pronouncements. He made his first Public Comments on roe v. Wade. Interestingly, when he finally was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1986 by president reagan, as i mentioned, it was paired with an elevation of associate justice William Rehnquist, to be chief justice. A lot of firepower, and not too much attention was paid to scalias history. Lets listen to that. This is a debate on the imperial judiciary. Night 78. December negativity a. [end video clip] the argument is not about whether there is a right or not, or if the right has been adequately observed or not and the courts are increasingly willing to set themselves up as the judges of that fact. That is one source of the difficulty. A second source is simply, you can speak very fast outlay of rights, in a facile way about rights. The courts have been increasingly willing to aggregate to themselves in the abortion situation for example whether indeed the right that exists is the right of the woman who wants an abortion to have one with the right of the unborn child not to be aborted. Who knows . In the past that was considered to be a social decision which was made to the democratic process. But now the courts have shown themselves willing to make that decision for us. [end video clip] i was just saying that during his chicago tenure he made his first Public Comments on abortion. And you just show them. And i think it aligns very neatly with how his jurisprudence later played out. His view that abortion, both as a matter of legal principle and also as a matter of tradition in historical practice in the United States was a matter best left to the states to decide rather than deny to the justices of the Supreme Court. That was up to his jurisprudence and what he advocated for was ultimately what happened last year in the dobbs case. During this year, he became a major contributor to a News Organization called the Federalist Society. Would you comment on how significant the Federalist Society has become . When he was at the university of chicago, he was solicited by a woman, an early founder of the Federalist Society, later a clerk for him, to be the first campus faculty advisor for this new group the Federalist Society on the campus of the university of Chicago Law School in 1982. Similar chapters are being formed at yale and elsewhere. This was really a fledgling group. They were law students who wanted to counter what they saw as liberal orthodoxy that was present on law school campuses. Scalia served readily as the first faculty advisor, and some people said if youre asking for spark you will get a fire. He was there have a bit and listing finding office space for this new fledgling clerk group, finding them funding through grants, achy connections and phone calls, housing some of the students in their home when they needed it. He played an extraordinary role in the development of the Federalist Society, today of course we know the Federalist Society as the single most Influential Group of lawyers perhaps in america. A group of conservative lawyers, not just for students anymore, they have chapters around the world for practicing attorneys. Scalia remained involved with it for the rest of his life not only by participating but teaching when the Supreme Court is off for the summer for continuing educational programs. A little more on scalia rise to power, and the next part is the d. C. Circuit judge court. But on the way, this goes back to the careerist narrative he actually turned down 2 an appointment to the Second Circuit court. What can be learned about him from that . When the Reagan Administration took office in january 1981, scalia put in for the job of solicitor general of the United States. This was a position that a friend had previously held. It represents the federal government in legal cases that go up to the Supreme Court and argues those cases before the Supreme Court. That was the job scalia wanted. He was passed over. Then he was passover when president reagan named an individual to fill a vacancy on the pc Circuit Court of appeals, which is one rung below the Supreme Court, the second most powerful court in america some say. He was passed over in favor of his friend again. When the vacancy appeared on the Supreme Court, Sandra Day Oconnor was named instead. Scalia had been passed over three times in about seven months. I call this chapter bitterly disappointed, because he told his first biker for that he was bitterly disappointed at not being chosen to be solicitor general. And i quote from tom petty, the waiting is the hardest part. A vacancy opened up again on the pc Circuit Court and scully was nominated for it. Before that happened, he was offered a seat on the seventh Circuit Court of appeals which operates out of the midwest. And scalia really had cut his teeth on the ministry of law, to most lawyers it is the dreary us the most dismal subject, but he left the ministry of law. The powers of regulatory agencies versus congress, how much difference to the court should give to the decisions of regulatory agencies, and the pc Circuit Court, their main fare of their docket is administrative law. So as he told his first biographer, he said hello, i wait. And that gamble, scalia was a good poker player, paid off. So when we talk about the Circuit Court, there are couple notes i wrote, not about his jurisprudence but about him and his personality, he brought the first word processor to the court. He used his clerks differently than other judges, including hiring a counter clerk, he annoyed the chief judge might editing his drafts. [laughter] im sure by editing his drafts. [laughter] and he developed a friendship with ruth Bader Ginsburg. Wrap that up for me, i dont want to send to much time with the time we have left, what do we learn about these things that i just listed . He had an affinity for technology for be back to the early 70s when he was involved with the Telecom Revolution and was the first judge in the d. C. Circuit court to use the word processor. And yes, he struck up a famous friendship with a lady who had been a charge on that court two years running, when he was appointed. She had been nominated by president carter, and that was ruth Bader Ginsburg. And this book, scalia rise to greatness, is the first book to publish early correspondence between both of them. And so we see these handwritten notes, correspondence and memorandums, draft opinions flying back and forth. This is never been published before and it really chronicles the germination and blossoming of their friendship induce internal documents, you can see ruth Bader Ginsburg ultimately flat angry flattering, needling and provoking scalia on the various cases before them, testing his commitment to the constitution. For his part scalia lets his hair down in these opinions and exchanges, and he comes to trust her so totally that in one of these memos he designates his vote to her in his absence knowing that she will see if the correct way and has his proxy vote. He says at one point he apologizes for a late opinion and says sloth that i am, and at times he says lets be unanimous and even apologizes and thanks ruth Bader Ginsburg for helping see the errors of his ways. It is a fascinating dynamic between them. We also break their relationship as kind of the avatar of friendship among intellectual combatants, this shows the birth and flowering of that relationship. Your approach. You report that there is a trouble correspondence. Trove of correspondence. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is needling him and controlling him and trying to nudge him towards one jurisprudence out, or another, then at the very same time she is writing to another judge saying heres how we have to address scalias challenge. And that is part and parcel of judging, the rallying of others to your point of view to try to fill out a majority. Just to minutes left, and the important thing is the work that he did as a judge. Will let you figure readers find that out in your book. I want to fast for 21986. Ronald reagan talking about Antonin Scalia a when he was sworn in. I want to see how Ronald Reagan characterized him. [video clip] job scalia is a brilliant judge, he had had a career as a lawyer and a judge. There he became known for his integrity and independence with the force of his intellect. She jumped Justice Rehnquist and Justice Scalia, congratulations to both of you. With these two outstanding men taking their new positions, i consider this a time of renewal in the great system that our forefathers gave us. [end video clip] that was the swearingin, which was three months after he was nominated by president reagan. Talk about those three months and what it was like. You referenced earlier, two at the same time, and the real lightning was rehnquist. How did the administration prepare . The Book Publishers for the first time a lot of the documents that were generated at the Reagan White House and the department of justice to support this twin nomination, and it shows that the white house devised an elaborate campaign on behalf of scalia, probably more elaborate than any Supreme Court nominee ever received to that point, to cultivate various voting voting blocks in the senate, and to capitalize on the fact that he would become the first italianamerican on the port court. Scalia was eager to go and those who work with him who work is guided through the process reported it was like he was meant to do this, like he had been waiting his whole life. When he had sit downs with the senators, some of them still around today like mitch mcconnell, and until recently, pitt lahey, chuck grassley, some of the senators still around today. When he met with the senators, it was easy for him, who was so skilled in debate and logic and rhetoric, to feel the inquiries and charmed them as he had done some others. One last clip i thought would be interesting to hear, with joe biden in an exchange with nominee Antonin Scalia a. Lets watch. [video clip] i intend to take a similar contrary approach not a public thought as there is no use preaching to the choir. Im kind of fighting against that here, fighting against that inflation here. Well, let yourself go. Because its pretty boring so far. [laughter] i cant answer that question by knowing what you mean by the right of privacy. Can you acknowledge whether or not you believe that there is a fact that we start over again. Do you believe that americans as a whole belief that there is a right to privacy that they have, inherent, they have a right to privacy. Do you think that is a deeply and profoundly help belief by American Society . Now, ill give you that. Ok, were getting there. All right. How where the hearings overall, how would you characterize them . They were very different from the ones that had come before, and were far more cordial than what had been called in a position for rehnquist. With joe biden being the ranking democrat on the committee, which was controlled by republicans, it would only be a few months later in the midterms that democrats would reclaim control of the senate and that joe biden would become chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee and preside over a number of Supreme Court preparation sissies including robert bork and clarence thomas. He makes changes with scalia, this book presents the real critical examination of joe bidens role in the glia confirmation process. The president today likes to boast about how many confirmation processes hes been involved in. He really did not distinguish himself in this glia process. If you look at the transcripts which we examine carefully, there are various moments in which senator biden had to retreat our product things that were of no interest to anyone and only extended the proceedings, points where he had to apologize, and he even said publicly that he thought that Justice Scalia would not be measurably more conservative than the man who he was succeeding effectively on the court, retiring chief Justice Warren burger, and rehnquist who is becoming justice, chief justice, but that they could see was filled by scalia. And the suggestion that was no more conservative than him was the precise opposite of what everybody had been saying for 90 days. Scion five minutes left, as we go into this hearings, we have an extensive record from his teaching days, his public appearances, also jurisprudence, legal records from his time in the district court, the Circuit Court, excuse me. He had a unanimous vote ultimately, 980. Did any of the democrats who voted for him come to regret that . I dont think so. Everyone recognized his intellect, his fitness, the American Bar Association gave him the highest rating possible. They had doubts about his commitment to individual liberties, which were important to them, such as the right to constitutionally protected abortion or affirmativeaction programs, scalia did not think that those particular programs and policies were rooted in the law. He thought that if people wanted those programs, they should not be using the courts to achieve them, they should be using state and federal legislatures to enact them as laws. But no, i think, what transpired later in Supreme Court confirmation processes, the ugliest of the processes that we have seen since then, i think most people would look back on scalias confirmation and say there was a model of cordiality. Your biography suggests that from the earliest days people saw him as headed for the Supreme Court, im going to play a clip on him with one of the interviews you get to cspan about, this is when he was on the court of appeals about possibly being automated dominated. [video clip] you cannot pick up a newspaper that only bites about the sport in which they dont mention you and george bork. They mention you a lot because of the decision, and the other candidates. What does that do . Your friends must Say Something about that. Your colleagues. Does it bother you . Up well. Uh, well. You must be he must know that your name they mention for a job like that plus whatever a token on the subway costs now, well get you on the subway. Its very much a matter of lightning striking. [end video clip] i guess what wrong with having a directed career aspiration . s family members and former clerks have always resisted or bristled at the indian that the Supreme Court was an admission that he harbored early on. In fact, he did. This book, scalia rise to greatness, tells a story for the very first time, having interviewed a priest who is one of his Early Childhood friends with them in the summer of 1959, they were headed towards opus dei and ask scalia where he was headed for. He said i am headed to the Supreme Court. He said im going to work for this law form, they have a washington division, i will be sent to washington, and i will rise. And that story has never been told before, and this priest is still alive and is an unimpeachable source. As you say, theres nothing wrong with being directed early on. Charles schulz knew from the age of five that he wanted to be a cartoonist. Scalia had this ambition early on and what the Supreme Court was and knew why he belongs there. And all of us, including scalias family and clerks and ardent defenders are better off that he had that insight and acted on it as he did. James rosen spoke, just published today, scalia rise to greatness, the first to a twovolume biography, thank you for giving us an hour. Thank you. All q a programs are available on our website, or as a podcast on our cspan now at your app