Transcripts For CSPAN3 Sushma Raman John Shattuck And Mathias Risse Holding Together 20220904

For a number years under the leadership of john shadegg and also from the center. And the point, point and purpose of the project under the name reimagining rights and responsibilities in the United States was to take a bit of a selfie. What the reality on the ground regarding rights and responsibilities in the United States is and our findings have been rather sobering. To put it mildly and with this book we are handing over to you and we are handing this handing over this book to the public. The intention of of of generating discussion about what the realities are around rights and responsibilities. And allow me by of doing some stage setting here just to for a moment about the title, why we have chosen the title and but also historical reference here is are the underlying historical reality to which this title is a reference. So the title again is Holding Together the main is Holding Together the what is supposed to be Holding Together about. We are talking about the United States. One truly remarkable thing, the United States, is that it has been together one way or another, obviously with a lot of challenges, but it has been Holding Together as the republic, as democracy for about 250 years. And that an amazing we saw the democracy that the republic can become this old saw is is an amazing accomplishment and it will require a lot of sustained work to actually make sure that theres going be another 250 years now that there is a future at all and our book is meant to make is designed to make a contribution to the kind of debate that is needed so that is an ongoing Holding Together. If you think about Historical Context here, the the athenian democracy athens a democracy for about 300 years it was Holding Together as the democracy for over 300 years before it fell apart as that kind of governance. The republican stage of roman history lasted for about 500 years before it fell apart as that particular governance structure. And what enabled these to to last for that long was that athens for these 300 years and roma sort of public for about 500 years, had a sense of Holding Together a shared had had a shared perception that the relevance of forwarding together as a democracy also public was, much more important than that any particular side would get its and for that reason they lasted that long and that to my mind is also the secret for ongoing existence of a political entity to continue into future. That there is a spirit theres a spirit of Holding Together a willingness, a determination to maintain the political structure over above possible interests that that might be prominent at some point in time. So again, our book is meant to be a contribution to that kind of debate is necessary for the United States to to continue to hold together. I am delighted to be introducing to be able to introduce our speakers for today. Now i in a moment will hand over to my colleague of the course and this was my ramon was a coauthor of this book major major brain behind this book. Also and who will give an overview of the societal rights crisis this book is concerned with . She will then hand over to john chaddock, who is lead author of the study the moving spirit, really behind this project. And john will talk about some key findings and in this book. And then we are very lucky to be joined by two very distinguished colleagues from harvard law school. So, john then turned over to martha minow, former dean, distinguished professor at the harvard law school, a and martha will benton over to have a distinguished colleague at harvard law school, alan jenkins. Both of them, both martha minow and alan jenkins would have commented on of the book. And after that, we will be having a bit of a roundtable and a q and a with all of you, for which i will urge you then social my later with urge you to put your questions in the chat function. And now without further ado, from my end over to you. Sushma. Thank you. Matthias thank john, martha, alan and all of you joining us today. Any research and writing endeavor, particularly one that is collective in nature but takes a course of time and the arc time over which this particular book was researched and written was a particularly critical moment in the nations history. We witness protests for, Racial Justice that swept the country. We witness and interact on the capitol on january sixth and an impeachment process. We watched in horror at the attacks on Voting Rights, a more general rollback on a range of rights and a pending act that affected millions of people around the world, including in the United States. So the starting for our book Holding Together in the martha minow says rights are both ideals and of the shortfall of human. And i think that really captures quite well what we accomplished or what we tried to accomplish which is pointing out shortfalls but also pointing the ideals on which this nation built and pointing to a roadmap for us to build together a more just and open society. So i want to turn it over to john, who will share some the key findings in the project, which included not just Desk Research but also polling town halls, conversations with people around the country, as well as consultations, experts from a range of sectors. So over to john. Thank you. Thank you very much. Sushma and thank you and marcus for being such standing colleagues as well as coauthors. This project and i also want to thank especially martha minow for her eloquent forward and shell give remarks about this book and. Then also, i want to thank Allan Jenkins for, his thoughtful comments throughout the project. And i also should really give a big shout out to our Research Assistant whose outstanding work is. In 100 pages of footnotes. So those of you who look at the size of the book know that you probably dont need to all the pages, but definitely 100 pages of footnotes provided great deal of detail about the research thats been done. So this book is about a search for the values can hold the country together. As mathias said, i think we know that the u. S. Is a nation of unprecedented diversity. Its been built over a centuries, not on ancestry as so many other countries have, but on immigration and on a history of slavery and on the subjugation of its indigenous people. So its a very complex in which americans have been thrown together by chance. And sometimes exploitation, but have held together over these centuries by a belief that, and i quote, all people are created equal and have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I think were all familiar with where that quote comes from. Now, there have been centuries of struggle for equal rights. Equal rights for realization of these rights, constantly punctuated by violence and rage, racism and bloodshed. Civil war. Segregation and above all, heroic movements of the people for. Their rights over the centuries of american history, the right to vote to equal protection and equal opportunity or freedom of speech and religion, individual dignity, autonomy, due process of law, and a democratic of government. And it is our view at, based on everything that weve studied in this book, that the ongoing long struggle for rights actually defines what it is to be an american today. And it has in the past. Our book is about these values, about how theyre being hijacked and about how can mobilize to reclaim them. And i think its the book that hopefully can encourage and indeed give hope to the defenders of equal rights in. These deeply discouraging times. Now, the central question that we take up in the book is what do americans actually think about their rights today . This is original, not simply research. And to find out, conducted a series of town Hall Meetings around the country and nationwide polls. The polls were run by the National Opinion research center, the university of chicago, one of the leading nonpartisan polling organizations in the country, and the results were quite remarkable, and here are some of them. 80 of americans across the political spectrum said that without our rights, america aka is nothing. Rights today are not secure. But americans have more in common than many people think. Now, thats a remarkable and complex set of views that were expressed on the front end of our poll and in many of our National Town Hall Meetings. It seems to fly in the face of all the polarization that we see in the country today and in a moment. And later on in the in our discussion, i think will address that. But sticking with the polls, when we dig into the polls we find that they really suggest theres a possibility of bridging political divisions by, focusing on shared values, the shared values of equal rights. A majority of americans agree that rights actually include responsibilities. They are not simply freestanding rights that exist for individuals groups. But there are broader civic responsibilities. Eight out of ten in our poll agree personal freedom must be balance against the responsibility to keep people safe in a pandemic notwithstanding all of the controversies around mask and all the various measures taken during the pandemic. 80 of americans actually agree that they have a Civic Responsibility to help people keep people safe. The pandemic. Seven out of ten in our poll agree that the u. S. Should have automatic Voter Registration because citizens have both a right and a responsibility to vote now. 30 of americans in our poll reject the culture wars that are being fought at the political that really are the things seem to define the poll or the Political Polarization of the day. They reject them because they dont live at the extreme. They live across the broad center. 72 say that theyre fed up with polarization and that politicians are intentionally dividing our country. Surprise. Recently, again, the polls show that the pandemic actually caused a majority of americans to have more, not less respect for others. 75 say that the events of the last two years have made me think more positively toward americans of different races or ethnicities than mine. And 73 say that the racial diversity makes our country stronger. The pandemic has also stimulated public support for what we call economic rights, which may be found explicitly in the constitution, but which are increasing only important to americans. A right to health care now favored by 75 of americans. A right to educate. 72 . A right to housing 71 . So the bottom line of our polls and there are many, many more results that are comparable to what ive just told you is that a majority of americans have an expansive view of their and responsibilities as citizens. And this really comes to toots, what i would call reaching back into an earlier era of american history, a silent majority, a silent majority is demographically and politically diverse, made up of democrats, independents and yes, even some voters, to be sure, who may disagree on specific issues but have a common commit to democratic values. The silent majority has potential to hold the country together, but its diversity keeps it from being politically cohesive and its overshadowed by a much more activist extremist manner. Its over working to prevent it, working to prevent the country from together. And its this minority is found in the 30 approximately of those who dont agree with many of the propositions our poll. The extremist minority is made up of a mostly constituency thats motivated by fear fear that the equal rights of others they see as threats to their racial, cultural and political dominance. We know their major cause in 2021 was overturn the president ial election by spreading claims about voter fraud. And of course, that led to the january 6th violent insurrection, capable because this campaign failed the extremist minority is now trying to change the rules of game. Theyre attacking democrat values that have broad support. The silent majority. Theyre manipulating institutions that were designed to check in the constitution. They were not promote destructive power. The courts in particular. Also the congress. The state legislatures. This extremist minority. We need to look out a little more closely to see what its comprised of. There are really four groups. Youre all with the leaders political entrepreneur. Others like donald trump and the politicians who are jockeying to succeed him, who promote lies and fears and prejudices and grievances to, attack enemies and keep their followers line. Then there are organizers and supporters who see the promise of equal rights for all americans as a threat to their previous dominance, Voting Rights as a threat to demographic dominance, racial as a threat to racial supremacy. The third group of the extremist and social media that are spreading disinformation that poisons the democracy. And the fourth group, in a way, is the most and in some respects the most surprising, because theyre in the federal courts, having been appointed by a president who twice lost the popular vote. And theyre especially the Supreme Court, where theyre on the verge of destroying rights. A majority of americans say they want to see protected. Now, this extremist minority is undermining the electoral process. Over the last year, 19 states with trump nominee, state legislatures enacted, 35 new state laws that make it harder for americans in those states to vote. But the polls show that a majority of americans want strengthen, not weaken, the right to vote. 87 , including percent of republicans, Favor National standards to protect the electoral process. 82 , including 55 of republicans, favor increased early voting, promote maximum participation. Even more disturbingly right to equal protection of law is under severe attack. An assault on the rights of women is now coming from Supreme Court, which on the verge of overturning long settled Constitutional Rights, including a womans right to choose whether to bear a child. This is completely of step with Public Opinion. 72 , including 55 of republicans, agree that a womans right to make decisions affecting body and her personal life should be protected. Civil Rights Enforcement been undermined, making it more difficult challenge systemic Racial Discrimination. But 81 , including 64 of republicans, agree that the laws against Racial Discrimination should be strengthened, not weakened. Discrimination against lgbtq people has greatly as a result of the culture war against gays. But 76 , including 64 of republicans agree that people should be protected against racial because of their Sexual Orientation or gender identity. So these are some remarkable findings in our polls. And its clear that there is a huge gap. Public policy on rights and Public Opinion and on rights as American Values that at least theoretically are holding our country together and we need to explore further what can do to this gap. Are certainly plenty of ways according to what weve found in our studies in which the underlying causes for the gap can be attacked. But its going to be a long and slow process. Polarization has causes. Certainly the political culture wars that i mentioned that are used by extremist polities like the Florida Governor ron desantis, to stimulate this extremist base, the spread of disinformation through social media and, other means of spreading information on the spurious charges of election, greatly amplified by social media led to the capitol insurrection. The politics of fear that are stimulated by politics and in the extreme minority attacks on Asian Americans as causes the pandemic attacks on immigrants as criminals and racist rapists by president , former President Trump and on the Mainstream Press as enemies the people. So there are many causes of polarization Party Primaries that promote extreme maoism are another cause that punished moderates. Were seeing right now a whole parade of primaries in which parties, particularly the republican party, is being pushed further and further to the right, to an extreme position by the Party Primary process. So there are many potential remedies and i wont go them in any great detail, but i will just put them out there and we can discuss them a little bit further later. Above all, we want to depose authorize the electoral process, for example, by nonpartisan oversight elections, which is favored by. 87 of americans. We want to reduce the influence of major donors in political campaigns through a transparent, messy and required disclosure. Public financing. These are all tools are at hand and, which some of which actually have bypassed is an interest. If not support. We could bring in structure changes like ranked Choice Voting that promotes a more more moderation and make moderate a range of multiple choice for voters available. Again, something to be explored further, which we go into in some depth in our book. There are other policy reforms that we could accomplish by reaching across the partisan divide that have crossed cutting appeal. Again, according to the research that weve done. Regulate social media by requiring transparency of the algorithms that it uses to spread disinformation. 81 of americans would support that. Protecting the privacy of personal data requiring transfer Police Guidelines and training on the use of force. 85 of americans support that. And even in the hotly contested area of gun rights, a ban on assault weapons has 70 support. So were not without resources here. Its simply developing a mobilizing the political will to able to accomplish results. Our polls that a left right coalition for economic rights would be very possible for example, in health care and education, 75 of americans and nearly half of all republicans are calling for more Government Spending to address issues of economic inequality. And getting all this started organizing at the local level. Thats a tall order to for anyone who has ever done organizing at the local level. But its what thousands, millions of americans do every day. Local officials are where the action is. Poll workers, county clerks, School Boards parent organizations, local mayors, councils, state legisla leaders. These are where the hijacking of rights begins. And where action is needed to respond. So let me close by simply saying that what we need to do, above all, i believe, based on the findings in book, is we need to support the revival of what i call equal rights, patriotism. We need to stimulate national in the values of freedom and democracy, which so Many Americans, the great majority americans, say they support. In that respect, we need to mount a bipartisan, if its possible to consider such a campaign to take back flag. This is not something thats been popular with those on the political, but its something that needs to be accomplished. So let me close the words of john lewis, who said to whom we have dedicated our book, that freedom is not a state. Its an act. Its a continuous action. We all take. And every generation must do its part. So thank you very much. And thank mark. So if i could turn over you now for for your thoughts. Okay. Well, thank you, john and susan and mathias for this terribly important book and effort and everyone involved in it. This is a time when its depressing to read the news. This is a time when young are showing more signs of depression and anxiety than in many previous eras. And we who are teachers are often asked by our students to give them reassurance that things will be better. And i am sorry to say, we look at history we look at the long sweep of history and the length of democracies has not been encouraging. You know, aristotles famous reminder, the republics devolve into democracies which degenerated to despotism. Its not so encouraging. And so for anyone whos wondering, why am i even listening to this is too depressing, let me just say, this book is one of the few a sources of hope that i have actually encountered in the last year or two. Let me just also say that reasons for hope are even more strained than when the book was in print. The ways in which polarization has actually increased, as we see now, who initially denounce the assault on the capitol on january six, backing away and joining the disinformation activity, the evidence that students in the United States lost so much time and learning during covid the enactment by 36 states of laws that restrict the discussions of race in american history. This is a very very troubling time indeed and. I want to underscore one thing that john just described, which are the dysfunctions our actual democratic process, so that this between political preferences, what actually gets adopted or enacted in the ballot because of gerrymandering that, the filibuster which is a favouring of a distinct minority and the electoral processes that have been rigged in many ways to benefit those who are incumbents. So okay, enough with being depressed. But i will say there are at least these three, maybe four sources of great hope and from this important book. The first is in contrast to disinformation. Its filled with facts and in contrast with a lot of academic discussions. Its filled with reasoned facts. The combination of the town halls, the polls actually give information that cuts through the noise. Thats generated by so much of the airwaves. The electronic social media conversations to show theres so much more commonality, so much more agreement than common story. So we are less polarized and around issues like economic rights, even like that at the police we need for security. But we also need them to respect and comply with civil rights laws and restrictions so that theres nuance, understanding about rights that is just so heartening and, so encouraging. The second point of encourage ment is that there is a match really between these sentiments in the United States and also in europe the recognition that there are similar kinds of broad based, if relatively silent support for these. Thats encouraging as well. I suppose. I guess i do find encouragement from is that some challenges that would seem to be defeating us are sources of hope. So despite all seeming polarization around covid many people actually report that its made us stronger find ways to build community and connection and i think the most encouraging and hopeful aspect of the book is that it actually offers paths forward concrete directions for change. I do want to identify just two questions that maybe we can talk about in the question and answer period. What is where to start when it seems that were polarized even if the data show that were less polarized . Is there a message that is a good place to start there . Local government . Maybe. John just mentioned. Is there some cultural activity to start . How to build this the political will, if you will. The sense of momentum that there can be quite for hope and and change thats. One question a a second question that i would put to us all takes that point about social media maybe theres a lot of bypass an agreement that theres a problem theres less agreement about the solution and even the call for transparency. You know, none of us here and most of us in america will not get much out of disclosed algorithms. So what is it that actually could be that would make a difference and i offer here at least two thoughts about that. But again for discussion. One is to pursue the possibility of capital and not antitrust solutions the form of breaking up big social media much as a governmental requirement of competition in the content, moderation and activity of the big social media. If we could pick, could we actually produce some kind of virtuous circle so that theres not only transfer, but maybe even the chance to a mediator of social media content . That actually gives us a priority for reliable information rather than disinformation. Thats a thought. And secondly, lee, im heartened to see the Current Administration identify broadband and wireless access, a basic human need. Is there there. Thats a basis for for hope and next step there about if were is widespread distribution access. Maybe we can hear from more voices. So with that will happily turn. My wonderful colleague alan jenkins. Thanks so much, martha. And you, sushma and mathias and john for including me in the launch, this wonderful book. Im joining you all from muncie. Lenape a Ancestral Lands now as the state of new jersey. As i consume book. One of the things that im most excited about and moved by is the approach. So in chapter after chapter reminds us of the fundamental that we share and strive towards as a nation when it comes human rights. It, in clear terms where were falling short and also where weve made some important progress. And there are some places, including in the electoral bill, the diversity of people with electoral success today. And importantly it documents not just and unequal outcomes, but actually causes of those, which i think is extremely important and something that we often dont delve deeply into. And then as mathias and martha have both said, it offers concrete solutions that can prevent, discriminate and that can address the violation, human rights and in many ways, i think is is its superpower. The example from the book that ill focus in the few minutes that i have that the area of policing and criminal justice, our criminal Justice Systems are supposed to keep all communities safe to prevent harm and to uphold the values equal justice and accountable. But as the book points out and amply documents, were falling far short of those goals, particularly with regard to communities color to indigenous, to queer communities in particular. And again, the book not only points out the grossly unequal and often outcomes that unfortunate, weve become very with, but also of the systems, the choices the decisions, the policies that lead to those outcomes. For example, the biases and stereotypes that often cause Police Target people of color who they believe are out of place in white neighborhoods as one of the the important causes racially motivated killings and tragedies. The abuse of stop and frisk and socalled broken windows, policies that operate to encourage racial profiling and unfortunately, we are seeing cities return to now despite the lessons that they dont keep us safe and that they violate fundamental human rights. The harsher sentences black and latinx people often receive, on average as compared with white people, were convicted of precisely same conduct. And i think an often overlooked aspect the media that cause the killings of native americans and transgender americans, for example to go underreported, sometimes unreported. The book also captures the importance notion of intersectionality, the idea that, for example all native american women experience, different violations of their human rights than often native american men or women from other racial and ethnic groups. The idea that the specifici of the intersectionality of our different identities matter they, matter to us, but they also matter in identifying and addressing Human Rights Violations. The authors give statistics, but they also say the names of many of the people who have been lost to, in this instance, Human Rights Violations by, police and the criminal Justice System. They the often painfully familiar names breonna taylor, tamir rice, george floyd and others, and also lesser known names like anita riley and lorraine polanco. People whose names we often dont hear, but were also the victims of Police Violence and importantly and to to kind of pluck us from brink of depression. As martha noted, they offer promise saying practices that are working in places around the country sometimes places around the world to address, prevent, to remedy Human Rights Violations. Again here, specifically to the criminal Justice System, redefining public by investing prevention and in social services and in economic opportunity, proven demonstrated methods for creating safety, increasing safety in communities and reducing the likelihood of Human Rights Violations. Eliminating qualified immunity which so operates to create impunity for Law Enforcement officers who have violated constitution rights, time, equal Justice Reform aims to the distribution of federal funds to local and state, something that encouragingly the biden is now doing as part of an executive order that was signed. President biden on his first day in office and is now being implemented at nine federal agencies, have now developed equity plans, something that has never before happened in our federal government and activism. We are fortunate to live in an era of social from the movements around stopping hate against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders to the black lives matter movement, to the metoo movement, to lgbtq plus movements. This is an era of movements and in my view, and i think reinforced by the findings of this book, that is our best chance for maintaining our democracy for Holding Together, for ensuring that human rights protected. So as i noted, criminal Justice System is just one of the many sectors of this book it looks at. And for which it proposes solutions. Its close to my heart, but there are many others that are equally important and equally as pressing. Its an amazing i really urge all to read it as soon as it becomes to you and that im going to turn back to. Sushma, thank you so much. Allen martha and john and matthias for getting us started. So i really like question on where do we start in the of seeming polarization but before i come to that im actually wondering martha, if i could call on you on a news event that just happened and id love your thoughts on this. Elon musk said that he would reverse twitters ban on trump calling the ban morally wrong and. I am just curious, what are the implications of this in the months and years as we think about the use of social media to spread disinformation and also in terms of how it political processes . So any thoughts on that and . Id love to hear the thoughts of our experts here on this issue of how to move forward. You know, it is a very challenging issue. I think being permanently from any platform is like excommunicate. Its pretty serious punishment. On the other hand, if ever there was behavior that seems to warrant it. I to believe that we have evidence here of such willful fomenting of hatred and this information on the part of trump. It might be warranted, but more importantly, i just think some ground facts are helpful. The social media platforms are all companies, private companies have their own Constitutional Rights of freedom of speech. Those the rights to edit and the rights to create norms and ground rules. Again, i underscore it would be helpful to have more competition rather than just a few platforms harms that dominate. But do believe that. Thats right. Is one that the constitution does and should protect. So there is no right of a private person named anything to have to be on any platform. It is a decision that is made by private companies that have a choice and have a power and the dominant companies all have norms of conduct and they distribute those norms of conduct and if they have been, they have the right the prerogative to enforce those known conduct. Thank you. So, john, i know in other conversations weve had youve often touched on Voting Rights central to progress. Im wondering in response to marthas question on where does one start when we are in a state seeming polarization. Would you agree that Voting Rights where we start or is it Something Else . Well, i think Voting Rights as i said in my remarks actually has a high degree of at least a very high level agreement in the Public Opinion sector and we find that i think the most striking fact in the Voting Rights era is that people really want to the right to vote, to be sure. We have a lot of noise. On the one hand and on the other hand about whether or not, theres voter fraud or whether the system is inherently subject to fraud. People want a secure system. So i think would be possible to develop a secure system, which on the one hand promoted the right to vote and guaranteed the right to. And indeed, as i in my remarks, 80 of americans would like to see registration and universal voting because voting they see is a both a right and responsibility. But on the other, they want to see national, nonpartisan and standards for voting. So theres room here. I for a Political Movement whats happened voting probably the best example of the title of our book that the subtitle the hijacking of rights in america because whats happening here is that a distinct minority and extremist minority as essentially in many states tried to reduce peoples access to voting, make it more difficult vote because they dont certain types of people to vote because afraid theyll vote on the other side and you know that thats really a narrow i mean this is not something that reflects the Broad Perspective of the american people. So i think Voting Rights is the top priority. I think its also underneath it all. The the most important. Right. Holding together the whole system of rights, because if people can vote, they have no voice, they have no participate and no opportunities. So i would put it at the top of the list. That doesnt mean that these changes can be made quickly. Fact, we saw the the defeat of the major Voting Rights legislation in the or at least the failure to get it enacted in congress in the last session, largely as a result of the filibuster, her and the minority trying to hold it up, even though the majority of votes were on the side of Voting Rights. So Voting Rights is really in many ways where i would start the process. I thank you so much to is i have a question for you which is from the audience and im paraphrasing it a bit so you and i had cotaught a class on Economic Justice where we tackled issues of inequality and injustice and this person is asking why, we dont consider the issue of taxation of the wealthy as part this rights ecosystem that we are working. Shouldnt the shouldnt we as a public have right to reasonable and nondiscriminatory taxation. And so what are your thoughts about this issue of tax justice and tax policy . Should it feature more centrally in arguments, particularly, we think about how to bring together and where we start in the state of polarization could increasing the economic pie be one approach. And yeah, let me give two answers to that. So my personal view and you know why its not more strongly emphasized this book, these are two different things. So my my own view on that is, yes, absolutely and you know, i think creative thinking about taxation and also using taxation to to empower people who are losing out in an economically developments i think is a you know its a great debate to have and i think its also incredibly to understand that the policy space and the taxation domain is substantially larger than what the recent decades have communicated to us. So in the postwar period, the highest marginal tax rates actually were above 90 . This strikes people these days as a completely ridiculous thing to, but it actually you know, it was the highest really bar about 90 and the highest marginal rates between the end of the Second World War and the reagan years were always upwards of percent. So it really is in the reagan years, but the beginning of the neoliberal age that have a completely different tax landscape. So we can think about taxation, even within the domain of the american policy as were just willing to go back a little bit more than just into the neoliberal age. So, so absolutely, yes, we should be doing that. But then, you know, why is this this of claim not more strongly emphasized in this about because that is, you know, we would expect for that to be a more substantive area for disagreement. So one one thing that we have tried to emphasize in this book is really, you know, domain where we expect americans across the board to find a lot of agreement on taxation policy is probably not one of them. Thats why its not in the in book. But as i have the screen, i would actually like to promote into the question of my own sense. We have three lawyers on the screen here and its going back to the to the question about the simple to the issue issues surrounding Supreme Court. So, john, you know, when john pointed out the you know, the various parties were undermining, you know, the common purposes as Many Americans seeing them singled out the court as as one of those, which is in a way very radical statement. But of course, what we see the court now do and these days is to undo something thats across the board and john mentioned the number of 72 consensus on something that will be made undo a kind of a social arrangement that we have had working for, for for 50 years. So question for for the lawyers on the screen, is this is the is the court losing . Is the Supreme Court losing legitimacy as part of the american project project. Well, i think opinion polls suggest that thats absolutely the i also think not wrong. And the Supreme Court, the United States history has more often been a source of restraint on movements and slowing the movement for equality freedoms than it has been anything other. And if take the message of this book seriously, its about unleashing power of democracy. The courts are important for ground rules, but the antidemocrat panic nature is cannot be denied. Its at its very core. The court and the Supreme Court, most particular we currently have a majority of justices who were approved by who represented less than the majority americans and. Three of them are appointed by a president who we see less than a majority the popular vote. So they does not reflect the public. Well, no, i dont want direct and full. I dont want to subject every right to an opinion poll but that i think to the extent theres any genius in our system its the tension thats created between more popular and democratic forms and some rules that are enforced by a system thats supposed to be outside politics. Look, ive been teaching over 40 years. I have made my career on the basis of arguing. Theres a difference between law and politics. I honestly say that. Now, with regard to the United States Supreme Court. So theres a loss of respect and its appropriate that theres a loss of respect. Well, let me make one quick comment on this. I agree with marcus comment. Of course. But i think what what we have, particularly in the decision that i cited, which is not yet a decision, its only a leaked draft opinion. But if roe versus wade were to be overruled, this would be the first case in which a settled constitutional right in, this case, a right that has been established for over half a century or about half a century, would be explicitly overturned. And the disruptive quality of that, leaving aside entirely the question of the values underlying that, is huge. And the role of the supreme. Should not be one one of disrupt thing. This society in a fundamental way is what what this decision will causing all of effects that are only now beginning to be explored. So in that sense the court is truly radical. Its operating in a system where theres gridlock in the other parts of the government, of the federal government and therefore what americans are beginning to see is that they think the court is in charge of their lives and thats in, you know, in a sense, legis in in areas they never would considered that to be an appropriate role for the court. Alan, any thoughts as our third and final on the screen . Yeah, youve added me as lawyer. I was trying to keep a low profile. Anyway. Yeah, i would just add, you know, implicit in my colleagues comments, the the difference between legitimacy and popular right the. You know, we dont we shouldnt care if the Supreme Courts decisions are a line with Public Opinion. The bill of rights and human in general are inherently anti majority and principles. Theyre there to protect people who are unpopular, who are besieged, who do have the political power, often to protect themselves in the legislative context. And so, you know im not so concerned a lack of a alignment between public and the Supreme Courts. When the Supreme Court struck down found on constitute intermarriage people of two different bands i should say on on the marriage of people from two different races that was an unpopular act but it was consistent with upholding the rights and the equal protection clause though what i think you know martha and and john are pointing to and i fully is legitimacy right is the Court Following its own the rules that have existed for interpreting the constitution and laws or are they making decision based on their own politics and ideology and what they think the way they think society should be arranged . And thats what unfortunately, we are seeing with this court, whether or not we see the fight as a final decision, the draft opinion that was leaked and that is part what is draining the legitimacy of the court with much of the american public. And that is a very problematic development. What he said thats really, really important and and i do think that the issue legitimacy so related to trust respect that is what is really most fundamentally in jeopardy between groups in the United States and regard to institutions. So all the major Public Institutions low levels of respect, levels of trust, thats a very danger this environment for maintaining social peace or the structures which we work through our disagreements every society has disagreements. But if we dont actually agree about, how do we deal with our disagreements . Thats what leads to violence really points, especially given this decline of trust is occurring globally and is occurring every single sector, not just government its in business, its in the news and, ingos as well. So in the last of moments before we wrap up, john, im wondering if you could put on transatlantic hat and share with us your thoughts. Some of the trends that weve captured in, the book and the implications for globally. You could focus on europe if youd like, or a more global lens, and then ill turn it over. Matthias well, a few comments and certainly we see a Global Crisis of human rights and democracy and we dont need to look any further than ukraine to see where that whole crisis go and indeed has gone for the people of ukraine. But, but i will obviously make point because im trying throughout to provide a basis for encouragement and very discouraging times for the people of ukraine, a remark able they are showing the way they are showing how a can really together around its values even when its under the most brutal kind of physical assault and weve seen now for you know, almost two months and its continue and i think its an inspiration to us all. Now, thats not to celebrate whats going on in ukraine in any way, elsewhere in europe. There are issues that are, in a sense, more insidious than the attacks on the and human rights the country in which i spent seven years as president of the university in hungary is is now and has been for the last ten years ruled by a person who is succeeded in using the electoral much the way in which the extremists in our country are trying to do to twist and destroy democracy by taking Democratic Institutions like. The courts. This is viktor orban, who is the Prime Minister of hungary. And so they orban model of attack on democracy is one which has actually been by a number of the leaders of the anti democracy and antihuman rights activities in the United States. First and foremost to them, of course, donald trump, but others as well. So, you know, there there there are major trends. The other final thing i would say is that weve seen a huge outpouring and sushma made this herself of a social movements for human rights all over the world. Many people standing up for their rights under circumstances of very great difficulty, many of them being destroyed. The leaders in china or, you know, the rohingya and in in in myanmar, burma, actually, as we would call it. So plenty of examples of heroic defense like the defense thats going on ukraine. And like the defense i think can be mounted by the silent majority in the United States. It will take time. Its a long process. This is not something that can happen overnight. But im old enough to know that this process certainly takes many, many years. Ive been involved in civil rights work for over 50 years myself, and there have been many ups, downs, and were in a series down at the moment. But im hopeful that given the kind of agreement around that our book points to its possible to to find ways of getting through this. Thank you all im afraid we have come to the end of the hour so allow me to thank arthur minnow, alan jenkins, one of our friends to the call center and to those project on particular intellectual fellow travelers and so many and so many projects. And thank you to sushma rahman and john shadegg for your amazing intellectual leadership. Allow me just to to finish up on a couple of thoughts that one really picking up on what john said about the role of patriots and how the left needs to own up to it and appropriated them. One quick thought on the role of specifically university in all of this. So, john, i think this is actually quite a remarkable thought to just reach out to the left and say, you know, if we want unity, we want Holding Together, insisting on this theme, if we want a preservation of a public spirit and a public thats mindset, you know, then cultivating the birds of the state, the, you know, also the distinguished documents of the state on, the left is incredibly important. But they are theyre everybodys they belong to everybody that should be cultivated for everybody. It reminded me bit of daniel allens wonderful book, our declaration. So daniel allen will be familiar to many a view center of the sci sat president of ethics will also put a bid for governor of Massachusetts Campaign that you just suspended and that book our declaration as a contribution to African Americans all around that document that goes against and other opinion that says well this has never been our declaration and she says no its all a declaration for African American in a way this is a similar spirit. So lets make sure in the country, you know, various lets make sure the symbols and the documents, the history of the country can be forward in a way, preserves and builds, preserves. It is and builds, but its not a unity of purpose because the chaos so the to that really is kind of political chaos thats that is that seems to be in the interest some people but its definitely not in the interest most people so so cultivating some words of patriotism i think on the left and its worth the idea and the very last thing id like to say we observe a lot of indignation in this country and its alienation with, the professional class to a large extent, do nothing we as professional class as University People so broadly, but also specifically here at harvard, we have an enormous burden of responsible entity to deal with this alienation and try to make it smaller and i think Harvard University needs to see its obligation very much in of strengthening the fabric of Society Making a contribution to the holding. You know, if harvard doing that, you know, then if Harvard University doesnt see its obligation this way, i think we are profoundly failing given the particular standing we have this society. So i also want to think of the event that we have here today and, this whole project as one of the contributions that we as Harvard University need to make to strengthening the fabric of society in some but that. Thank you again everybody thank you to the audience i hope you will acquire our book you will engage with it not because not primarily we want the book to be but we do want the book to be bought. What we want the ideas to spread. And the idea is to contribute to kind of debate that is needed towards this country being able to continue to hold together and my name is desiree. Im with the san marco bookstore. I want thank you guys for coming out tonight. I did for your first hear about this book in january when i was reviewing the summer catalog with my Penguin Random house rep. And it seemed like an interesting topic. And when i saw that dr. Seabrook was from usf, i thought well, i think that would be great. Lets do an event. They were thrilled. They reached out to him and here we are now. I did not