Former Harvard Law School dean martha minow questions whether forgiveness can strengthen the american Justice System. She is interviewed i george, professor and former federal prosecutors paul butler. After words is a weekly Interview Program with relevant guest host interviewing top nonfiction authors about their latest work. Ill after words programs are available as podcasts. Host full disclosure you and i go way back. He you were my law professor at harvard and you taught me family law. You were to go on from being a lowly assistant professor to a storied career not culminating but you were the dean of Harvard Law School. When i knew you you are my favorite law professor. Im not alone and that. In 2008 the junior senator from illinois was a man named barack obama and he said when i was at Harvard Law School i had a teacher who changed my life, martha minow. Guest its a delight to be here and i learned so much from you through the year so thank you for doingng that. Host i couldnt pass the opportunity up. I love the book because it has your voice. Its compassionate, to brilliant and its wise, its grounded and its definitely provocative. How did you come into this legendary career from access to the highest bar of the legalry power to writing a book about forgiveness . Guest i wrote a book about 20 years ago about Mass Violence and at that time the nsReconciliation Commission in south africa had just started and i was so intrigued by the development of a new Legal Institution toi deal with realy horrific violence and oppression and therefore the book and i called it finding an alternative to these two different responses of her thick act. Ever since that time people have asked me why between . Why cant lots of or give and it nagged at me. Host the law does forgive so you talk about how right now the law can be forgiving. It may seem surprising particularly since one of the most fundamental commitments to at least western law is having rules and whatever forgiveness is thats not what it is. Actually whether its bankruptcy rules that allow forgiveness of debtnk or the pod pardon powr of governors. We have explicit devices some that are less wellknown in the criminal field. You are an expert. An expungement of records and sealing of records but even the discretion that a prosecutor has got to go forward as a kind of forgiveness. Host i was fascinated by your discussion of all of those my want to talk about each one of them. The idea of facebook as a forgiveness. I know we have that word forgiveness but you almost have a redemptive transformative quality which i found so rich and provocative. I want to start by thinking about limits to forgiveness. You Say Something seem unforgivable. Are they . Guest well maybe it helps to start a defining forgiveness but i do find it as letting go of justified reasons. I dont think we are even in the land of forgiveness if we are talking about charges or disputes whereha there isnt a justified way. Its like dealing with justified forgiveness. I guess i do think we needh to acknowledge that the law is imperfect and people are imperfect and at timespe letting go even unjustified blame is better for everybody. Its better for society. In a personal context its much better even for the one thats been harmed during the grudge around. In the legal system we are dealing with emotions so much but we arent dealing with mass incarceration. So far in the punitive direction it really makes me think about its time for a reset. Host i agree with you about mass incarceration but there are situations where vengeance seems wholly approve rethree at. In 2015 mother and manual in South Carolina dylann roof was welcomed into a prayer service. Now is the whole world knows it was he was a white supremacist terrorist of the murdered nine people. Some of those family members talk about forgiveness. How should we feel about that . Guest well i do have the kind of astonishment. I did at the time when family members at the raymond and the sentencing hearing said that they forgive dylann roof. Its nothing i can imagine doing and its not that i think the law or any other person should expect of anyone. I think there are particularly worrisome aspects where there is a racial or gender expectation about who is supposed to forgive in a society but i do think that those individuals were acting out of a religious belief and for them it was the right thing to do. My own analysis personal forgiveness has nothing to do with what the law should do and in this instance where dylann roof committed and absolutely inexcusable act, hateful act and has never shown contrition, to the contrary, he has been boastful and proud about what he did. Theres no place for forgiveness and the legal system because he nhas violated the trust of everyone. Host there is a sense sometimes that we africanamerican people or women or old tbt people to be forgiving when we are confronted with justifiable grievances in a way that might be different from white folks or heterosexual people are men. Its completely true and its for the same reason. The same statement coming out of the mouth of somebody who is angry or disproportionate when its someone who has occupied a position of power in society then its somebody whos not. We need to be vigilant about batting concerned about it and at the same time i admire the 18yearold rather of the murder victim, killed by amber geiger the White Female Police officer ine dallas. His 18yearold brother said after the sentencing i forgive you. Its something to admire pretty comes out of his religious belief but there should be no lesser sentence in my own feeling for the conduct. Host when the judge stepped down from her bench and hugged amber geiger who was just convicted of murder and sentenced to 10 years in prison, the judge said that she hugged amber geiger because geiger asked her to. Guest i was more troubled by that pit the judge has a position as an officer of the law. She didnt do anything wrong in the sense that the trial was over in the sentencing was over but still she was wearing her robe and whatever her personal feelings were i guess i think they belong outside the courtroom. Host that is not in your mind a paradigm example of the kind of forgiveness the law should exercise and why not . Guest again that seems to me about an interpersonal relationship. What i am interested in is when law itself, the exercise of charges or adapting a sanction, even though its warranted it seems like okay there are good reasons not to let it go. And bankruptcy is a really good example. Host letscy go in order. You think about two different sets of kids, children who have been forced overseas are exploited in other ways and you also think about children mainly in the United States who get charged and are guilty of serious offenses. How should forgiveness work in that context . Guest you know one of the methods that we lawyers uses comparison and its always been striking to me because i do work in International Human rights to see how soldiers are discussed and treated in international law. Their people who are coerced and there are people who volunteer to join armed conflict. Many commit terrible acts, murder, rape. They recruit other children and then theres the question is the conflict what to do about those people . In the International Context the approach taken by the lot is those responsible and be a dolt should be punished and the International Criminal court has no authority to go after people who join the conference when they were children. Instead internationally while its less intimation theres a trend towards talking about reconciliation and rehabilitation and services and i contrast that with the treatment across this country of young people drawn into conflict whether its drugrelated or gangrelated and we have the opposite here. We have a punitive way of talking about predators as if they are in no context and no acknowledge meant of the world in which they are drawn into the could be in the drug trade where the schools are not offering a real opportunity etc. Etc. And we dont talk about the adults who are responsible and instead despite the origins of the court is a place that is supposed to be more forgiving and more rehabilitative we have made it a place that treats young people just like adults, either automatically transferring them to adult court or laughing kinds of sanctions for conduct that no other country in the world does. I think we could learn from that example and i think in both contexts coming up with an alternative like a Truth Commission where young people have a chance to account for what they did and admitted him to talk about it, and to maybe find a path to forgive themselves but also to reinvest in them so they have a chance to join society and be constructive participants. Host when you talk about the legal response to children should be, forgiveness doesnt mean that they shouldnt be held accountable. Guest absolutelyd right. Talking with former gang members they are the first ones who are blaming themselves and to know they did something wrong and in some instances young people are not heldld responsible and they feel adrift. They actually have a chance to say yes there were norms and i violated them and now im in corden what do i do . Host when you talk about child soldiers you mentioned that some children. Worst into going into that kind of terrorism and other children do it voluntarily. Should i the law treat differeny those two sets of children . Something they have intended to treat very differently. I think the continuum of coercion maybe even with children, but also present with all of us. When we say someone volunteered, understanding that context matters a lot. In my view, more relevant martha people now if they did something wrong. I am very affected by him even since the comment great civil rights lawyer, and professor who says, no one should be judged by the worst moment in their life. I the there is more of the simply in the spirit when we think about young people who have decades ahead of them. We should tap into that. Paul and criminal law, we thought about this term. It is the idea that when someone causes harm, there should be consequences. One of the purposes of this consequences is everyone should learn. If you make t a mistake, you commit a crime, you would be punished. The idea is that it will stop other people from committing those crimes. So in the context of children, since they are more vulnerable and more exploitable, if you are not or if there are not consequences. Our are you concerned. Martha and i am and i am concerned about education in general. There are pretty good studies that show that keeping larger and larger sentences, dont actually detour young people dissipating in criminal activity. It may be that actually thinking longterm, is not actually strong suit of a lot of adolescents. The response that the law should take, the deterrence is there are note to people are and what it takes to educate them. We talk about specific deterrence to the individual as well as general deterrence. So what can other people learn. And again, i think showing there is a path forward, is not goingg to undermine the recognition that is shameful to have violated the norms in this society. Paul a lot of understanding about children making mistakes, isnt formed by science. Including research you talk about that suggest that childrens brains take a long time to develop. In fact, now theyre not fully developed until there about 25. For mens membranes of the date longer and female brains. Thats with the evidence suggests. Twentyfive. Youre getting up there. The same time, in response to this evidence, there are some courts who are thinking about dealing with those who commit crimes including updates that are different from older folks. Honey feel about that. Martha i think its about time that law took a greater note of the developments in neuroscience and certainly, that kind of evidence that affected the Supreme Court decision about parole for juveniles. I think it is also relevant to what schools do and can do. Increasingly numbers of high schools in the United States have shifted their disciplinary process to one that is participatory with the other peers who actually can arrange for what is called Restorative Justice processes pretty in the linkage an educational experience for everybody. For those who have injured another, they actually have to be accountable. Also come up with a plan about what they will do in here with the impact of their actions are on others. Unfolded into the educational experience. That takes account of the social science of the developmental stages that the young people are at. Paul my mom is a former second grade teacher. She retired from the Chicago Public schools. She can be hard on kids. I find that is true of elective teachers of especially elementary and high school. And in some ways, they they develop Higher Expectations of them but another part is just about the rules. So in the criminal law, when idea is that the purpose of criminal law is to impose a minimum set of standards that everybody has to follow. We dont care who you are. Dont assault, dont steal. There would be ideas that is basic. As part of your responsibility as a citizen and if you dont obey those minimum standards, and you should be punished. It. Martha there are consequences and there should be consequences. I think every society has come up with things of that nature and the should be consequences that are known by everybody and applied fairly meanly. And theyre not always applied fairly and evenly. I think the disregard and process of the legal system is another factor to take into serious account. But teachers who are tough like her mother, is usually very well regarded by the students because they have high expectations. Theyre expressing a belief in the capacity of the young people to actually live up to those rules. A legal system that is inconsistent doesnt turn that kind of trust. And we dont have people trusting the legal system, it cannot operate, the police dont get the information that they need, they dont get the help from the community about who actually was to blame. So in part, the call for forgiveness in the law, on my part is the way to say, that is one way that we as human beings earn trust with one another. Paul you mentioned inconsistency in the law, and your book suggests that in some ways, when you talk about forgiveness of children who have committed crimes, that is a harder case to make. That seems unfamiliar but as you talk about forgiveness of debt. People think about that. They look at that forgiveness differently. Martha we use the word forgiveness so when we talk about debt, we go back in history, there was a similar moral you about failing to pay a creditor as we have about violating a criminal norm and while there is prisons pretty absolutely. Ultimately, luke unconstitutional by the Supreme Court althoughgh we have new fos when people cannot pay fees and fines by legal system itself. I think over time we have seen a fascinating evolution in the United States when it comes to bankruptcy. It is w actually present in the constitution. Congress is given power to enact a National Bankruptcy law. As in no small way traceable to Tomas Jefferson who was himself and that most of his life. And when he also when he was so much as jefferson, developed a political theory about it. He said when generation should not burn the next generation with debt. In many peoples views and associated in the United States are tradition of entrepreneurship in Second Chances for people to start a sssiness and it does not work. And we of course have business bankruptcy and personal bankruptcy credit and theres the same possibility for individuals to start over. There are consequences and of course for any assets that people have. They should be made available to help pay off the debt in there also is the loss of a credit rating. People may take ten years and Companies May take longer to build their credit rating. And it will be all charge higher interest with an x and they are borrowing. We allow people to turn the page and start over rather than being so varied by debt that they can never get out of it. And yes, iat do think there is a reason that the United States have a tradition of innovation and risktaking is the envy of many parts of the world. The Bankruptcy Law is part of that. Still in forgiveness of debt in bankruptcy as part of why the United States is a leader in technology. Really interesting idea, you talk about recent legislation, vagrancy legislation that exempts. Martha heres this inconsistency problem. Treating some kinds of loans differently than others seems to me to undermine basic fairness. And here underline the problem. When we have a situation right now, we have forprofit schools that have held is there not delivered quality education, the schools themselves can declare vagrancy. The young people to buy the loans, they cannot. And that seems really unfair in my mind. The nature of the exemptions is a political process. Those who were able to get the Student Loans exempted, thats relatively recent in the Bankruptcy Law. We could change it. I think we should change it. There have been programs to allow for Debt Forgiveness for young people. The Current Administration has [applause] on those programs. That seems counterproductive. We should be investing in young people. Paul when people say that these students knew what they were signing up for. You have to pay. Life sucks. I would rather not pay my mortgage but i know we have to pay it. Martha will i do believe that there are rules for a reason. But often times, and heres what bankruptcy does so well, the participation in a problem is more than one person. So the people who make these adloans, actually contributed to the problem. In the people who had the myth that these forprofit schools would actually lead to a job, thats a problem. And regulators who failed toly make sure that the schools delivered on the promise, they are part of the problem and then if we talk about people with Student Loans who actually went to go to, but they cannot get a job because of the economy is in trouble and again, is not entirely their fault. So recognizing that we have circles of responsibilities is another reason why laws should forget. And if i moments when we need to accommodate the competing interest which is what bankruptcy does. Many creditors, and not everybody is going to get paid 100 percent but we can spread what is available so everybody gets some of the money that is available. What are you worried about tpeople exploiting the system. A. Martha is a concern. A comments have even come up with a phrasepl for it. Moral hazard. Really developed in the contextd of insurance that when you know your insured, youre willing to take more of a risk. How we make sure people actually internalize and think hard about the risk that they are taking. And think that this is a concern. But i also think two things hard to put it on all on one actor to accommodate to a take account a all of the considerations. Predators ought to bcreditors og hard about the loan two. There are problems of developing countries that have lots of debt because they may be, took on too much debt that maybe they had a government system took on debt is not quite as of the people but more importantly, the maybe the creditors were taking advantage of these people who were in such need. There is a perfect situation where we need Something Like bankruptcy to be able to develop an accommodation and also need the creditors to be more careful. Paul one thing there creditors say, the Big International money fund or mortgage bank. We take risks. When reason that we take risks by giving some people mortgages, when they might not qualify for the regular theory. But for some, developing countries loans is because we know theres a guaranty never going to get our money back. And theres not that guarantee, then were not willing to take those risks. In the long run, that will hurt the folks that were concerned about. Martha is fascinating to me then mandela became the head of south africa, many people said you should refuse to pay the debt, the International Debt that was taken on by the government. And he endedss advisors decide that they would go ahead and repay because they did not want to lose the credit standing. Those are choices for the country to explore and i can admire that. But i can also see that in times, sometimes when a country this taken on debt, when individuals have taken on debt, they cant find a way out of it pretty south africa is troubled as it was, coming out of the side, did have some resources and ultimately was able to pay off the debt. Some take decades and decades and decades without any sign of hope. Paul in your ideal world, think about this staggering debt that a lot of developing countries have now. What should the legal response feet. Martha was interesting, we dont have a national or interNational Bankruptcy system. Instead, ad hoc bankruptcy has developed with institutions like the International Monetary fund is. Playing a role. Basically more hopefully come up with an International Agreement for a structure that is in place for when its needed rather than to try to scramble each time. It should set a kind of a parameter that discourages creditors as well as the country from taking on debt that everyone knows will never be repaid. At the same time come up with a itofit process for sensible prepayment negotiations if there unexpected balances like the world financial crisis. The one taught me family law and i know you also teach tconstitutional law and im so impressed of your knowledge of Bankruptcy Law and International Trade law. Martha thank you pretty. Paul how did you learn all this. Martha in the middle of thinking about this book, i thought how did i get into the subject and then i remembered, my students have rdebt, the school has debt andt was after the financial crisis in this country, everybody was dealing with debt and if we are lucky, with offers us is a skeleton key that we can use to learn tools to deal w with the challenges as they arise. Paul youre working it. I want to talk about another form of forgiveness that you write about. But before we get to that, lets talk about this moment in american history. There is this idea of culture which is especially on the internet when someone does something that is judge wrong and that person gets canceled. How should we feel about that or how do you feel about that. Martha i am worried about it. Human beings have a capacity to forgive. And thats how we live with each other. Cancel culture is the opposite of that. His quick to condemn and to condemn forever. It is very fascinating to me that every religion, every philosophy, is developed a respect for forgiveness to acknowledge the imperfections that we all have. I think one of the challenges that we living in the internet age has the dont have the three dimensional experience of looking someone in the eye and sing the effect of our conduct in the other person and imagining what if i were that person. And cancel culture is a picture of the internet society. Paul some people would say it is about righteous anger. Im wondering what is the relationship of anger and forgiveness that you forgive someone and be angry at them at the same time or does forgiveness require releasing that anger. I think anger is actually often the wellspring of a sense of injustice. So i think anger is a very important emotion and is a clue when we are angry that we should say oh, what does it mean. There often is an injustice. And each of us should have the dignity and selfrespect to demand the right kind of treatment read but if the anger swells out of control, and prevents us from having relationships with other human beings, that should serve the person, ourselves, we are actually trying to live a life. How can you forgive people who after your husband was assassinated and so forth and she said, because i dont, the anger will kill me. I think letting go of anger is a resource. And its often resource that people have less power are better at and at the same time, being forced to forgive is horrible. Being told that your anger is not justified. It is wrong when it is justified. What worries me is this all or nothing. Sometimes it will take people time to forgive. People should have the time. But to cancel culture implies never read implies condemnation rated management forever and ever. A lot of people are asking me about me to and problems and when you forgive. For people who are charged with harassing. In my own thought is way too early to the about forgiveness. Weve only recently started to recognize a harvard so many who have been accused and denied that theyve done anything wrong, and somewhere in that world of acknowledging wrongs, were not in the forgive forgiveness land. We need anger we also need forgiveness. Paul so some of the men who have been implicated in the me to movement, in some instances have suffered consequences and then in other instances, have gone on to procedures of appointment. So as we feel about the Supreme Court justice is been the subject of these allegations. Would he or should he be welcomed to be a judge at the core competition. Martha about your school has struggled with that one. I guess i do believe that that any particular case, that when people acknowledge that they have either done wrong or that if they claimed they did not do it they condemn the wrong that is to being described. Maybe ist a chance to bring the back into a place of honor. They can often take a long long time. Paul a pardon is, a power that the president has that comes from by the divine kings, much better history in that chapter of the book. How is this idea that later, the head of state should be able to forgive the legal part in the form of the pardon. As a start. Speech of think for the kind words. There are others who study it and know much more than i do. Butor i was fascinated to learn that the founders of the United States saw the pardon power of kings. And they transmuted it in many ways to be a power even to the president , one of the few unchecked powers. Theyre not checks. The other branches, the president s power to forgive. Implicit and the president can only forgive federal crimes. And one is exquisite. The president cannot forgive in cases of impeachment. Which i assume include his own impeachment. As well as the impeachment of others. Paul physicals mean the president can pardon himself. Martha it is not mentioned in the arguments go both ways. If there is one exception and there is no other exception. Maybe he can pardon himself for crimes. I think that violates an unwritten form read no person can be the judge in his own case. And would be viewed wisely as a legitimate. The framers actually endorsed that view the no entropy the judge in his own case or her own case. They also had that the is that the pardon power for the present to be of a check on the judiciary, that when the criminal Justice System has work is always through, there still may be all Things Considered factors that would warrant letting go of punishment or condemnation maybe after someone has served their sentence or shown or when theyve done other services to the society are in one instance, the rebellion, would be better for everyone if we just let bygones be bygones. President gerald ford offered it in amnesty to people who resisted that the draft in the vietnam era, there was a way to try to say, lets put that chapter behind us. Paul what about s when present preset gerald ford offered up pardon to president nixon. Martha i thought was wrong. And many others at the time but it was wrong. But who wouldve thought that nixon was giving up the presidency. Then he would be punished for the rest of his life that way. It would be better to turn this page for the country. The time, there was concern that that was a trade. It had nixon said to ford, i mustve done, you can be positive you pardon me. Still, that would be very troubling rated i dont believe thats what happened. Both photos. Maybe is lost in the trials of history but i do think looking back, now with decades intervening, it was better for the country. Paul flight is that. Pardoning richard nixon, innocence made him look above the law. So freaking do like if that was a surreal tv show when they do the alternative history, what if nixon had not been pardon and what if he had been charged with a crime just like some of his cabinet officers were. He was o made to suffer the uensequences. Martha as true with the alternative history, we could speculate, and mind inviting good mightve helped the countryav underscore the principles. The opposing party, or the other kinds of conduct and he is patriots were charged with but at the same time, especially when youre talking about a whole society or large group. Theres a risk of creating cycles of revenge. An essay okay we have but put a period of that he lost the presidency. Now we are moving forward. He did not want to spend the whole time of this presidency still fighting over what nixon had done when hand known when he had known. So i can see the value. Maybe at the same way that after the transition to democracy, in south africa, truth and Reconciliation Commission came up with the embassy. Lets put that behind us. Lets start a new chapter in our country. Paul one of the things i found ffascinating about your book is the way that you excavate the constitution to find forgiveness. Say talk about embedded in the bankruptcy pot cause. And then pardon power of the president. How did that work out. So lets talk about president trump. Who is the first pardon. Martha is unpardonable. His part first pardon was to share, of arizona. It was pardon not for an ordinary crime. It was f pardon for persistent violation of civil rights and then, being held in contempt of court for continuing those same acts were found to violate the law. Enter pardon him, it seems to me was unpardonable. Really unjustifiable. For many reasons. One was it looks like the back to Campaign Supporter because he was an earlier supporter of then candidate trump. Another reason was basically a slap in the face back to the legal system says, not only is it okay to violate the civil rights law. Its okay to consistently violate them. And it was a slap in the face to the judiciary Holding Someone in contempt. Thats not the only time the present trump has actually smeared that judges and said that he does not respect them socalled judges. Thats one of his phrases. In the rule of law, thats what makes us and the use of the pardon power to actually undermine the law rule of law is inexcusable. I think one of the problems that we have the country right now is that we do not actually even come up with a way to talk about when the pardon is allowed and would and who should be accused when not. Paul would like to hear from you on just that issue. Often your name comes up in the context of Supreme Court appointments. You have a couple of colleagues. Ive not heard you talk about that. But who would president martha b. Martha oh gosh, i have honestly never thought about that. Although i am very interested to see some new governors Governor Newsom in california, Governor Pritzker in illinois. Do something that i think would want to do as well. And that both of them have exercised communist party polish to pardon individuals who are not undocumented immigrants. Now at risk of being deported under the current policies that treat the directive being undocumented is a crime. And in case of governor christer, he forgive a man but served in the u. S. Military and then he was charged with a drug offense and he was convicted and he served his sentence. And at that point, he was guarded. That seemed like a good use of the pardon power. Someone who would actually shown he had paid his dues in multiple ways. And shouldnt now faced deportation. Paul fun but your former student, barack obama. How did he do in terms of pardons. Martha i am very proud of my own recent students who approached me and said could we ask president enobama to write something for e harvard law review. I said hes a little busy and they said no, he should have a statement about what he is trying to do with criminal justice. So he did. A runt an article he published in about how he used the pardon power among other tools to try to deal with the discrepancies for example, when the congress changed and reduced the sentence for the use of crack cocaine which had been part of that. Part of that was people had been convicted and was serving time. And he knew the pardon power to allow people out who had already served, the amount of time that the new sentence would have provided for. I think that he had the problem of finding that the pardon process as he developed it was too slow and he did not pardon as many people as he wanted read you compare it with present trump it is not have any process at all. It seems tore be whatever the reality tv star that he has talked to most recently as influence. I would have a process more role like and that is what president obama did. Speech. Paul some people think he was too careful. Martha i think so too i think he started too late. He served for eight years and he did not start this process until well into the second term. Paul i think if i were present, i would pardon a whole other people. If i think about the issue of mass incarceration, twopoint 3m people in jails. I think as a president , why not just start with 100,000. Lets make that art object. Martha it do think that the way in whh we incarcerate people or people, for a long time when they have no violent offenses, nor the country does that. That would be a place to start as well. But again, the president only has the ability to pardon federal crimes. Most people who are suffering from mass incarceration are dealing with state crimes. Thats why governors matter. Paul earlier in your career, you work for justice for judge marshall. Speech of this theme was my hero and one of. The major reasons that was full. Paul i didnt know him. I became a h lawyer because i ws inspired by his career. But i see him i guess as an adventure, as someone is righteous anger. Do you have an idea about where he would be on this forgiveness thing credit. Martha i think youre very right about that and when it is time to injustice. I remember as a law clerk going to a him and saying, his flight was dismissed because of that side of thes statute of limitation but of such a compelling issue from maybe it ittoo late. Shouldnt we make an exception to allow this claim to be heard. And he said if we change the role, they wont be there for us coming with the rule. And that affected me. So i taught procedures for years and years and years. And again a sense of righteousness and injustice, it inspired me to go to law school. And to teach law for almost 40 years. I think in the same time, when it comes to the inequities of the legal system or to recognize that people turn their lives around, he could be very forgiving. I think he is the only justice in recent memory who actually served as a defense lawyer in hee criminal Justice System. He understood the life circumstances of so many people who get caught up in crime. In a way that i wish more judges did. Paul we talk about the amber diaper case. Former Police Officer who was convicted of murder on killing a man inside his own home. She got ten years. That case was involving people who cheated in order to get the kids into elite schools. Some of those folksch have gott, what appeared to be and i think the ball some folks who have concerns about racial justice, theres this uncertainty of a response. Some people think those are appropriate sentences but the problem is, a lot tino, they probably would not get the benefit of that mercy. And in the question is, should we hate on the fact that these white folks are getting these benefits and or should we say thats great, and everybody should get them. Sood in various that the law wil not change until white folks have to suffer the same kind of consequences that people of color do. Eoso in effect, i think thats n argument against forgiveness. It is an argument that the way the law changes here, is when people people power, are concerned about what is happening to them. Speech of theres a lot of power in that approach. I guess i do think the inequities of the legal system, really justifiably produce distrust. It should be front and center for any of us who care about teaching law and improving law. And i also feel strongly the discussion of forgiveness needs to be prudent because while we as individuals should be free to decide to forgive when it however we want. If these legal system will use these tools whether its bankruptcy or pardons, it should do so in a way that reflects the rule of law. Being fair and evenhanded. One of my favorite cartoons that some new yorker chosen judge with a very big nose and big mustache looking down at the defendant with the same nose and mustache and he said obviously not guilty. This is a danger of human beings that we have biases and prejudices. And we should be. Held to account. Are we acting on those or are we applying fairly. In the sense of letting the swimmer in stanford off lightly as the judge did for Sexual Assault because the judge said in such a Brilliant Future ahead of him. What about the others the judge doesnt recognizes have Brilliant Future. As bad. That is wrong. Paul it is emotional when we think about the law and exercising mostly, you can do. It in the movingly. Its also emotional when we think about arguments against forgiveness or why in some context it might be hard to forgive. Something happened to you, that to me would be tough to deal with. You are the recipient, one of the most procedures awards and ectomy of the you can get. And your accepting the award and some Student Activist, interrupts the ceremony. In a call you out. That would be tough for me to feel. Martha is not the most comfortable. And moment in my life but i understood the Student Activist monopoly focusing on me. Were using a moment of some visibility the same way that is often the case when their people were sympathetic to a cause and they become the subject of this harsh criticism. I do think that when students violate school rules, they should have consequences. This is not a violation of school rules. It was an interruption of a family. I was happy to listen to them. Give them their chance. Have some fun. Paul it doesnt necessarily have to e easy. Speech of no, i think it takes hard work. Im not very forgiving. I drive in boston, who can be forgiving. But i think anger, innocent something wrong, is an important part of asserting our own selfrespect but i also think that having a Bigger Picture of what is it store and who is this about. How do we moveur w forward. Every major civilization has come up with ways to deal with harms and violations than are just always appoint rules, they also include forgiveness. The jubilee in the bible, coming up with methods to forgive to people who are in kars rated less than three and let the ones who are enslaved be free. Paul i almost detected a spiritual vibe. Martha i think it is fair. I am jewish. We just had the most significant holiday in our year. We have the atonement, we apologize to people around us are wrongs that we have done. Its certainly been a big part of my life. But in the research for my book, i was fascinated to find the role of forgiveness and really and every religion. All kinds of christianity. Theres a deep commitment to cultivating what is a Human Capacity that it does take work. Just thing about children who dont know how to apologize. How do you apologize and teach responsibility. Its not an apology we say, well if anybody was hurt. That is not an apology. It takes work and learning and to apologize. It takes working morning to forgive. Paul an apology is it a prerequisite of forgiveness. Martha in my book it helps enormously. Paul sl did you tell Amazing Stories and some hard cases in the book. One of the ones that moved me the most, has to do with an immigrant. Who wanted to become a citizen. This was in the 1940s. As part of his nationalization. It is revealed that he committed an unspeakable act. Tell us about that case pretty. Martha lewis, and he had five children. One who was born with such disabilities and he basically was like an infant. He could not feed himself or take care of any of his bodily needs. At some point, he took chloroform and put his child to death. It is unspeakable. Ive spent a lot of my life working on disabilities. Every life in my view is worth it and this was absolutely terrible. He was convicted. What is interesting that in the criminal actions, you see immigration activities. The jury recommended the upmost clemency to the judge and the judge can turn suspended the sentence. So those are elements of forgiveness soaked into the legal system and the jury recommending, the judge responding. Andy then we have the second process of immigration process. And now demonstration of good moral character for the prior five years is required. His lawyer made a mistake. They filed for citizenship such that this act fell within the fiveyear period in two more weeks, and a pass. That itself was another part of forgiveness. So says that apple the certain time period, you dont look back. So it should happen in that immigration case. Fascinating effort by the court of appeals for the Second Circuit was to say well we dont know what to do and what he did was wrong and should we put it to moral experts. We dont know. So going to dismiss the case without prejudice allowing him to refile in the future. Another kind of forgiveness. Orpaul so we are ending here but i said at the beginning, barack obama said that you changed his life. This is your 25th book. Martha i dont know. [laughter]. Paul wow. What is the impact that you hope this book has pretty. Martha yi really do want to encourage discussions about how this country and people around the world, can draw on the very best of human capacities rather than the worst. In the legal system i have devoted my life to, and the idea of justice, the legal system itself makes me think. And it should be able to go and the best of human experiences and the best includes the capacity to forgive. I hope that the criminal Justice Reform movement in this country stepping into that sentiment. Building coalitions that otherwise dont agree on anything else and i hope that we can learn to see the start a new page. That it could teach us something something and criminal law that even people who have served these sentences have these llllateral consequences of the crimes. Not allowed to vote in many places. Not allowed to keep their children. I love to get housing in certain places. I think is enough is enough and we should find ways to acknowledge forgiveness. The law is imperfect. This is the capacity that we have. And we should draw on it. Paul in the book, you talk about soldiers, and the issues of the pardon power by some president s. A book that manages to be optimistic and inspiring. Speech of thank you. Paul so i think it will have the impact that you hope for it. So talking to you. Martha it has been wonderful to see you and talk with you. Paul thank you. This program is available as a podcast, while afterwards programs can be viewed on our website booktv. Org. Youre watching a special edition of book tv, now airing during the week 12 members of congress due to the coronavirus pandemic. Tonight america at war. First historian Megan Kate Nelson looks at how the civil war impacted the marking west as the union and Confederate Army fought for control of the territory. Then author robert plumb now harriet tubman, clara barton, and others have an impact on the civil war. In